In a landmark ruling that concludes a decade-long legal saga, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja has sentenced Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the founder and leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), to life imprisonment after convicting him on multiple counts of terrorism.
The judgment, delivered on Thursday, November 20, 2025, found Kanu guilty on all seven counts in the amended charge brought by the Federal Government.
These include allegations of inciting violence through broadcasts on Radio Biafra, directing attacks on security personnel, promoting the activities of the Eastern Security Network (ESN) described by the court as an armed wing of IPOB and making inflammatory statements that contributed to unrest in Nigeria's South-East region.
Justice Omotosho emphasized that Kanu's actions, including recorded directives to burn police stations, kill officers, and destroy public property during periods of heightened tension such as the 2020 EndSARS protests, constituted preparatory acts of terrorism.
The court highlighted video evidence and transcripts where Kanu allegedly ordered followers to target government infrastructure and security forces, leading to loss of lives and property. "The defendant portrayed himself as a defender of his people but instead endangered national security through violent rhetoric," the judge stated, designating Kanu an "international terrorist" due to threats extending beyond Nigeria, including references to foreign missions.
Prosecution counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), had urged the court to impose the maximum penalty under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, which prescribes death for the gravest offenses in several counts. However, Justice Omotosho opted for life imprisonment on Counts 1, 4, 5, and 6, citing judicial mercy while rejecting the death sentence. Additional terms of 20 years for one count and shorter sentences for others were imposed, all to run concurrently. The court also ordered Kanu to be held in protective custody without access to communication devices.
Kanu, a dual Nigerian-British citizen, was first arrested in 2015 on charges of treasonable felony and managing an unlawful society. He jumped bail in 2017 amid a military operation at his Abia State residence and fled abroad, where he continued operating Radio Biafra from the United Kingdom.
His dramatic re-arrest in Kenya in June 2021 and extraordinary rendition back to Nigeria reignited the case, drawing international criticism over alleged human rights violations in the process.
The trial has seen significant procedural twists: multiple judges presided over the matter, including Justice Binta Nyako who recused herself in 2024 after Kanu's accusations of bias. Kanu repeatedly challenged the court's jurisdiction, arguing that his 2021 rendition was unlawful and that some charges relied on repealed laws.
He declined to present a full defense, resting his case on the prosecution's evidence after a no-case submission was overruled, a decision the court described as a "gamble" that left unchallenged proofs standing.
During Thursday's proceedings, tensions rose when Kanu interrupted the judgment reading, questioning the legal basis of the charges and demanding referral to the Court of Appeal. Justice Omotosho ordered his removal from the courtroom for unruly conduct, proceeding in his absence.
IPOB, proscribed as a terrorist organization by the Nigerian government in 2017 (a designation overturned by a court in 2023 but later reinstated on appeal), has been linked to escalating insecurity in the South-East, including attacks on INEC facilities, prisons, and security checkpoints.
Supporters view Kanu as a political prisoner advocating for self-determination in the mold of the failed 1967-1970 Biafran secession, which resulted in an estimated 1-3 million deaths amid civil war.
The conviction is expected to provoke strong reactions in the South-East, where Kanu's detention has fueled sit-at-home protests and calls for referendum. Legal experts anticipate an immediate appeal, potentially to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, on grounds including the rendition and evidentiary issues.
Human rights groups, including Amnesty International, have long criticized the trial as politically motivated, while the government maintains it upholds the rule of law against threats to national unity.
This ruling underscores ongoing challenges to Nigeria's federal structure, with separatist sentiments persisting alongside demands for restructuring and equity among ethnic groups. As the case may continue through higher courts, it remains a pivotal moment in the country's handling of dissent and regional grievances.