Nnamdi Kanu: A Decade Of Agitation, Legal Drama & A Landmark Terrorism Conviction
By IFEOMA IZUCHUKWU
THE conviction and life sentence of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), marks a decisive moment in one of Nigeria’s most polarising political and judicial sagas. After more than ten years of arrests, court battles, nationwide protests, and diplomatic controversies, the Federal High Court in Abuja on 20 November 2025 brought the long-running case to an extraordinary close.
Justice James Omotosho found Kanu guilty on all seven terrorism-related charges filed by the Nigerian government, ruling that the IPOB leader’s actions, statements, and organisational activities constituted terrorism under the Terrorism Prevention Act (TPA). The court also barred him from accessing mobile devices or broadcast equipment, limiting his communication to monitored channels under the supervision of security agencies.
Yet the ruling did little to quell the loud disputes surrounding the trial—and instead deepened the debate about justice, state power, and the meaning of dissent in today’s Nigeria.
A Trial Overshadowed by Extraordinary Rendition
Central to Kanu’s defence was the claim that his forced return from Kenya in 2021—described widely as an “extraordinary rendition”—nullified any legal proceedings against him. Justice Omotosho acknowledged that Kanu’s human rights may have been violated but held firmly that such violations did not strip the court of its jurisdiction. Like rulings in similar U.S. cases, the judgement separated the legality of apprehension from the legitimacy of prosecution.
The court also rejected Kanu’s argument that he was being tried under a “repealed law”. While the TPA was amended in 2022, the judge clarified that the earlier version remained applicable to offences allegedly committed between 2018 and 2021. Section 98 of the Act, which allows ongoing cases to continue under prior provisions, was central to this interpretation.
A Courtroom in Turmoil
The final hours before the judgement captured the deep tensions that have defined the proceedings. Kanu filed several last-minute motions seeking a stay of proceedings, the suspension of judgement, and a referral to the Court of Appeal—all claiming that the trial lacked jurisdiction and that he was denied the chance to file a final written address.
The court dismissed the motions for lacking merit, prompting a dramatic outburst from Kanu, who accused the judge of bias and insisted the trial was anchored on “a non-existent law.” His interruption led to his removal by SSS operatives, after which the court delivered judgement in his absence.
The Long Road From Activism to Conviction
Kanu’s story is one of escalating confrontation between a secessionist movement and the Nigerian state. From launching Radio Biafra in 2009, to founding IPOB in 2012, to leading large-scale rallies across the South-east, his message of Biafran sovereignty resonated with many who felt politically and economically marginalised.
His clashes with authorities intensified with repeated arrests, bail battles, and the controversial 2017 military operation at his home in Abia State that forced him into exile. IPOB’s creation of the Eastern Security Network (ESN) further heightened tensions, as federal officials linked the armed group to rising insecurity in the region—allegations IPOB consistently denied.
Several dramatic turns—ranging from the 2022 Court of Appeal acquittal, to its reversal by the Supreme Court in 2023, to his dismissal of his legal team in 2025—shaped what ultimately became one of the most complex trials in Nigeria’s democratic era.
A Verdict That Raises New Questions
Kanu’s conviction, though legally final at the trial court level, opens a new chapter of political, legal, and social reckoning.
His legal team has vowed to appeal. Supporters insist the ruling criminalises self-determination. Critics argue that the judgement reinforces national security standards essential to the country’s unity. Meanwhile, the South-east region remains emotionally charged, with many seeing the verdict as a continuation of historical grievances.
As Nigeria confronts these divergent views, one reality is unavoidable: Nnamdi Kanu’s journey—from activist broadcaster to the most prominent separatist figure of his generation—has reshaped national conversations on identity, dissent, federalism, and the limits of state power. And even behind bars, his influence on the politics of the South-east and beyond is unlikely to fade soon.
