Nnamdi Kanu's Lawyers Denounce IPOB Leader's Conviction, Signal Appeal Plan

The attorneys remained quiet about the fact that Mr. Kanu ignored multiple attempts by the trial judge to prompt him to present his defense ...

The attorneys remained quiet about the fact that Mr. Kanu ignored multiple attempts by the trial judge to prompt him to present his defense against the prosecution's arguments.

Several ex-members of the legal team representing the Biafra advocate Nnamdi Kanu have expressed disapproval of the Federal High Court's decision in Abuja on Thursday, which found him guilty and imposed a life sentence for terrorism-related charges.

Commenting outside the court, Aloy Ejimakor, one of the lawyers Mr. Kanu mentioned as his legal advisors after dismissing his defense team last month, voiced disappointment with the ruling.

He mentioned it was "a highly unfavorable day for the judiciary and the criminal justice system."

The legal representative, who spoke to reporters alongside other members of his legal team, stated that the prosecution was unable to connect any of Mr. Kanu's broadcasts to unlawful actions in Nigeria.

"I am feeling sad... It's a very difficult day for the judiciary, a very tough day for the criminal justice system in Nigeria," Mr. Ejimakor stated during an interview following the ruling.

However, Mr Ejimakor remained silent about the fact that Mr Kanu rejected multiple requests from the trial judge for him to present his defense and challenge the prosecution's case, which flooded the court with numerous recordings of Mr Kanu's inflammatory speeches.

However, Mr Ejoimakor contended that the statements referenced by the court as proof were "simple expressions" and did not qualify as incitement.

"This is the first time in my whole career as a lawyer that I've witnessed someone being found guilty for simply expressing opinions in court. A person saying, 'Don't be foolish,' or 'Go and die,' doesn't constitute a crime. Legally, we refer to these as just verbal expressions," he stated.

Mr. Ejimakor argued that although the prosecution claimed Mr. Kanu made hazardous transmissions from an unknown place, it did not provide evidence connecting those broadcasts to incidents of violence.

"These are harmless speeches... but you cannot link any of these broadcasts to criminal activity in Nigeria — and he is still convicted. That is very concerning. It supports the idea that the Igbo man receives a different kind of justice in Nigeria," he explained.

In response to inquiries about whether the statements were inflammatory, he remarked: "Many individuals express such views on a daily basis... Should people be held accountable for that?"

He mentioned that the defense team would promptly move to the Court of Appeal, asking followers to stay composed.

Suggesting a plea, he stated, "As conscientious individuals... allow me to take this chance to urge for peace. We have another stage in the legal process, which is the"Court of Appeal, and we are going there."

A team member, Nnaemeka Ejiofor, showed hope that the appeal would be successful.

"Firstly... the prosecution was unable to identify any specific individual who committed any of the actions that Nnamdi Kanu is accused of inciting," he stated.

You claimed Nnamdi Kanu encouraged killings, but you didn't present a single individual who stated, 'Yes, I was the one he encouraged.' Therefore, it seemed to me that the court was providing evidence.

He stated that referencing the 2021 killing of Ahmed Gulak by unidentified attackers in Imo State does not indicate any connection to Kanu.

The court hands down a life sentence to Mr. Kanu.

Earlier on Thursday, trial judge James Omotosho,sentencedMr. Kanu received a life sentence following his conviction on terrorism charges.

The judge chose a sentence of life in prison rather than capital punishment.

He additionally imposed a 20-year prison term on Mr. Kanu for charge three, with no possibility of a fine, and five years for charge seven, also without the option of a fine. The sentences will be served at the same time.

Rendering a verdict, Mr. Omotosho stated that Kanu's behavior during the trial showed "disobedience" and a "consistent pattern of aggression," noting that the court was showing compassion despite his absence of regret.

"Certainly, the prisoner has not behaved correctly... He has created delays, time and again... Additionally, his disorderly conduct from the start until now is clear," he stated.

The judge stated that the court followed the biblical principle of compassion, citing Matthew 23:23, while acknowledging worldwide issues regarding the death penalty.

Life holds great value in the eyes of God... Therefore, for the sake of justice, I hereby impose a life sentence on the prisoner for charges 1, 4, 5, and 6, rather than the death penalty.

Mr. Omotosho stated that Mr. Kanu's remarks during several broadcasts, including threats of violence and the imposition of stay-at-home directives in the South-East, constituted acts of terrorism.

The defendant implemented the stay-at-home order in the Southeast... stating there would be a full closure of Biafraland... 'If you open your shop around 12 noon, we will set you on fire in that shop,' he said.

He argued that Mr Kanu's instructions were "unconstitutional, rebellious, and infamous," pointing out that the resulting closures left areas "empty, including the agricultural lands."

The judge stated that Mr. Kanu's broadcasts—such as assertions that "the Army of Nigeria will die" and that "everything referred to as Nigeria will be destroyed in Biafra"—backed the prosecution's argument.

Mr. Omotosho rejected allegations of an unfair trial, stating that the conviction was supported by evidence, such as video footage.

"A person convicted of the crime may face a death sentence," he stated, adding that the court opted for a life sentence due to compassion rather than obligation.

Copyright 2025 Premium Times. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (okay1).

Tagged: Nigeria, West Africa

Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).