The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has condemned the life imprisonment sentence handed to its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, by Justice James Omotosho, describing the ruling as unlawful and inconsistent with constitutional provisions.
In a statement issued on Monday by its spokesperson, Emma Powerful, the group said the conviction relied on a repealed section of the Anti-Terrorism Act and was delivered without any witness or victim testimony, which it described as a “gross violation of the rule of law.”
IPOB argued that one of the charges used to convict Kanu was based on a law that had already been cancelled, insisting that the Constitution forbids punishment under laws no longer in force. The group added that no individual had appeared in court throughout the trial to claim harm, intimidation or incitement from Kanu.
According to IPOB, the prosecution presented only edited online videos as evidence, with no eyewitnesses or investigative reports. The group also questioned why eight out of the 15 original charges were dismissed for lacking merit, while the remaining seven were upheld based on the same set of facts.
IPOB further challenged Kanu’s conviction on Count 7, which involved the alleged importation of a transmitter. It claimed the charge was already time-barred, arguing that the law sets a five-year limit for prosecution, while Kanu had been in custody for more than six years.
The group criticised the court for sentencing Kanu to five years’ imprisonment on the transmitter charge despite his extended pretrial detention, saying the court ignored the requirement to account for time already served.
IPOB called on journalists, lawyers, civil society organisations and the public to obtain the Certified True Copies of the judgment, insisting that the documents reveal numerous procedural violations. It said the issues raised ranging from the use of a repealed law to reliance on time-barred charges highlight deeper systemic problems within Nigeria’s justice system.
“The Nigerian people deserve a justice system that follows the law,” the group said, urging authorities to address the alleged inconsistencies for the sake of fairness and due process.
