BREAKING: NNAMDI KANU CONVICTED OF ALL SEVEN COUNTS RELATED TO TERRORISM

By ‘Leke Yusuf

Leader of the Independen People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has been convicted of Counts 1 – 7, in his on-going terrorism related trial.

Currently still delivering judgement, Justice James Omotosho; he pronounced Kanu of terrorism charges and declaring illegal sit-at-home.

“Declaration of sit-at-home without authority amounts to terrorist act”, said Justice Omotosho.

Count 1 – Terrorism Related

Count 2 – Declaring Illegal Sit-at-home order

Count 3 – Belonging to a proscribed association

Count 4 – Incitement

Count 5 – Unlawful Provocation

Count 6 – International Terrorism

Count 7 – Illegal Importation of Broadcast Equipment

The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, will today know his fate in the prolonged legal battle with the Federal Government.

Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, is expected to rule on a series of applications filed by both Kanu and the Federal Government, including a request by the IPOB leader challenging the competence of the charges against him and seeking his release on the grounds of alleged unlawful detention and infringement of his fundamental rights.

Kanu has been in the custody of the Department of State Services since June 2021, following his controversial interception and return to Nigeria from Kenya in circumstances his lawyers describe as “extraordinary rendition”.

He is facing seven terrorism-related charges bordering on alleged incitement, running an unlawful group, and acts threatening national security—allegations he vehemently denies.

He also sought an order setting aside all subsequent proceedings, arguing that they were founded on a nullity.

 

Kanu further asked the court to hold that the charges disclosed no offence known to law, as they were allegedly based on a repealed terrorism law. He requested an order striking out the charge for want of jurisdiction and directing his release.

 

He urged the court to dismiss the charges and allow him to go home.

 

However, Justice Omotosho had held that since Kanu failed to utilise the opportunity granted to him to conduct his defence, he could not claim to have been denied his constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair hearing.

 

Justice Omotosho reiterated the court’s position that no ruling or preliminary objection would be determined at this stage.

 

He noted that the case was filed in 2015 but suffered delays before being re-assigned to his court earlier this year, where it received an accelerated hearing.

 

He stated that the prosecution called five witnesses and tendered several exhibits before closing its case on June 19, 2025.

The judge observed that multiple adjournments were granted at the instance of the defendant, who sought to cross-examine prosecution witnesses.

 

He recalled that Kanu’s no-case submission was earlier overruled, and the defendant was directed to open his defence.

 

Omotosho emphasised that the court had ensured a fair hearing, but noted that Kanu, despite initially agreeing to enter his defence, abandoned it and began claiming that there was no existing law under which he was being tried.

 

He said the defendant had not demonstrated seriousness in the proceedings, adding that he had personally appealed to Kanu “in God’s name” to present his defence and engage counsel.

 

Citing Supreme Court authorities, Omotosho held that if a defendant fails to utilise the opportunity of a fair hearing, the court cannot compel him to enter his defence.

 

The judge ruled that it was on this basis that Kanu had waived his right to defence and proceeded to fix a date for judgment.

 

Kanu’s legal journey has been marked by numerous adjournments, court orders, appeals, and counter-applications.

More updates shortly.