Legal Team Condemns Nnamdi Kanu’s Life Imprisonment, Heads to Court of Appeal

Nnamdi Kanu’s Lawyers Reject Life Sentence, Vow Immediate Appeal

 The legal team representing Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has strongly condemned the decision of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which on Thursday convicted and sentenced him to life imprisonment on terrorism-related charges. The judgment, delivered by Justice James Omotosho, immediately sparked reactions from Kanu’s lawyers, who insist that the verdict is not only unfair but also a dangerous precedent for Nigeria’s justice system.
According to the legal team, the ruling represents a “travesty of justice” and an alarming shift in the interpretation of free speech and self-determination within a democratic society. They vowed to challenge the judgment at the Court of Appeal and, if necessary, pursue the matter to the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

Speaking to journalists shortly after the court session, Kanu’s special counsel, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, did not hide his shock and disappointment. He described the ruling as one of the most troubling judicial decisions in modern Nigerian history.

“Today will forever be remembered in Nigeria’s history,” Ejimakor said. “This is the only day I have witnessed a man being convicted for what he merely said with his mouth, not for anything he physically did with his hands.”

The counsel argued that the entire prosecution was anchored on statements and broadcasts allegedly made by Kanu, rather than any proven acts of violence. He insisted that the conviction sets a dangerous legal precedent, suggesting that mere words spoken by a citizen could now be interpreted as terrorism in Nigeria.

Ejiamkor maintained that the evidence presented in court failed to justify the extreme sentence. According to him, there was no direct link between Kanu’s broadcasts and any recorded acts of violence, destruction, or even assault.

“The verdict is not consistent with the evidence laid before the court. The sentence is overbroad, cruel, and unusual,” he said. “How can you convict a man for making a mere broadcast from a location that was never named, and you never tied that broadcast to a single incident of violence, not even someone slapping another person, let alone terrorism? ”

He further emphasized that advocacy for self-determination, whether popular or controversial, is not a criminal offense under Nigerian or international law. Many global movements have sought autonomy, and in most democracies, such demands are considered political expressions rather than crimes.

“To pursue a separate nation of your own is not a crime,” Ejimakor added. “In Nigeria today, it seems that if somebody says ‘don’t be silly,’ he can be convicted. Mazi Nnamdi Kanu made broadcasts, and so what? How does that amount to terrorism? What kind of precedent is being laid?”

Ejimakor disclosed that the legal team would immediately begin the appeal process. According to him, they are confident that the Court of Appeal will rectify what they view as a flawed and unjust ruling.

“From here, we are headed straight to the Court of Appeal. We are going to approach the justices there to review what happened here today,” he stated. “We are sure that the Court of Appeal justices will agree that today was a symbol of the travesty of justice that many have suspected all along.”

He added that the team was prepared to pursue the case all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.

“If the Court of Appeal disagrees with us, we will head to the Supreme Court. But by God Almighty, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is not going to stand convicted. This verdict will be overturned,” he vowed.

Another member of the defense team, Barrister Maxwell Okpara, also criticized Justice Omotosho’s ruling, suggesting that it was influenced by anger and sentiment rather than sound legal reasoning. According to Okpara, the judgment failed to align with the principles of fair hearing and objective interpretation of the law. He stressed that the legal team expected a more balanced judgment, especially considering Nigeria’s volatile sociopolitical environment and the sensitivity surrounding issues related to IPOB and the South-East region. Okpara appealed for calm among residents and supporters across the South-East, urging them not to resort to violence or civil unrest in response to the ruling.

“We understand the anger and pain that this judgment may cause among our people,” he said. “But violence is not the answer. We must allow the law to take its course. We remain confident that the higher courts will correct this grave miscarriage of justice.”

The ruling comes at a time when tensions remain high in the Southeast, where many residents view Nnamdi Kanu as a symbol of political resistance and cultural identity. The life sentence is expected to intensify debates on ethnic relations, security policies, and human rights in Nigeria. Legal analysts have also expressed concern that the ruling may embolden future prosecutions based solely on speech or political opinion, thereby shrinking Nigeria’s democratic space. Human rights groups have long argued that the government’s handling of separatist movements should follow international legal standards, emphasizing dialogue and political reforms rather than extreme punitive measures. With this judgment, many fear that the justice system may be drifting toward criminalizing dissent and political agitation, even when conducted without violence.

As the legal team prepares for its appeal, attention now shifts to the Court of Appeal and how it will interpret the arguments presented by Kanu’s lawyers. Many Nigerians, supporters and critics alike, will be watching closely. If the appeal succeeds, Kanu could be discharged, acquitted, or granted a retrial. If it fails, the case will likely proceed to the Supreme Court, where a final decision will be made.
Meanwhile, IPOB members and supporters are expected to intensify calls for his release, using both local and international platforms.
See Also... Alleged Terrorism: Nnamdi Kanu Petitions Court of Appeal to Halt Federal High Court Judgement
The sentencing of Nnamdi Kanu to life imprisonment has opened a new chapter in Nigeria’s political and judicial discourse. His legal team’s strong condemnation of the judgment, describing it as a travesty of justice, has sparked renewed conversations on free speech, self-determination, and the boundaries of judicial interpretation in a democratic society.
As the appeal process begins, the case remains one of the most watched and emotionally charged legal battles in contemporary Nigeria. The ultimate outcome will not only shape Kanu’s future but may also redefine the limits of political expression and dissent within the country.


By Primelineinfo