Nnamdi Kanu Moves to Stop Court from Delivering Judgment in Terrorism Case

The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a motion before the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking to halt the delivery of judgment in his terrorism trial scheduled for November 20.

Kanu, who is facing a seven-count charge of terrorism marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, was accused by the Federal Government of leading a separatist movement aimed at breaking away parts of the South-East, South-South, and some communities in Kogi and Benue states from Nigeria. He was also accused of inciting violence through his broadcasts and illegally importing a radio transmitter. Kanu has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The prosecution closed its case after calling five witnesses, while Kanu initially listed 23 individuals to testify in his defence but later withdrew the list, declaring that he would not defend what he described as an invalid and unlawful charge. Justice James Omotosho had fixed November 20 for judgment after Kanu failed to open his defence despite being granted several opportunities.

In a fresh motion personally signed on November 10, Kanu asked the court to suspend the planned judgment, arguing that his prosecution under the now-repealed Terrorism (Prevention) Amendment Act 2013 violates sections of the 1999 Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. He maintained that the trial, conducted under a repealed law, contravenes the Supreme Court’s directives and the constitutional requirement for lower courts to comply with superior judgments.

Kanu contended that the repeal of the 2013 Terrorism Act invalidates all proceedings conducted under it, insisting the court failed to take judicial notice of the repeal as required by law. He further argued that under the 2022 Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, the court lacked jurisdiction to try him without proof that his alleged offences were also crimes under Kenyan law or supported by a valid extradition order from Kenya, where he was arrested.

Representing himself after dismissing his legal team, Kanu claimed he was misled into entering a plea under a non-existent law, rendering the proceedings void. He asserted that the court’s alleged use of forged materials and disregard for constitutional provisions amounted to a denial of fair hearing.

He is seeking an order to arrest the delivery of judgment and a declaration that all proceedings under the repealed law are null and void. According to him, it is “in the interest of justice” for the court to halt the process until these issues are resolved.