Terrorism: Police tighten S’East security as Kanu knows fate today

The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, is set to know his fate today in a protracted legal battle with the Federal Government. The Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice James Omotosho, is scheduled to deliver judgment on several applications filed by both Kanu and the government. These include Kanu’s challenge to the competence of the charges against him and his request for release over alleged unlawful detention and infringement of his fundamental rights.

Kanu has been in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) since June 2021, following his interception and return to Nigeria from Kenya in what his lawyers described as an “extraordinary rendition.” He faces seven terrorism-related charges, including alleged incitement, running an unlawful group, and actions threatening national security—claims he strongly denies.

Justice Omotosho had, on November 7, set Thursday for judgment after Kanu failed to open his defence, despite being allocated six days by the court to do so. The IPOB leader had filed a fresh motion challenging his trial, arguing that the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act under which he is being tried had been repealed, rendering the charges invalid. He also sought to expunge his earlier “not guilty” plea, describing it as made under deception, and requested that the court set aside all subsequent proceedings.

However, the judge noted that Kanu, having failed to utilise the opportunity to present his defence, could not claim denial of his constitutional right to a fair hearing. He emphasised that no ruling or preliminary objection would be determined at this stage. The case, which dates back to 2015, had experienced several delays before being reassigned to Justice Omotosho earlier this year, where it has since received an accelerated hearing.

The prosecution called five witnesses and tendered multiple exhibits before closing its case on June 19, 2025. Omotosho recalled that multiple adjournments were granted at Kanu’s request, including for cross-examination of witnesses, but his no-case submission was overruled. The court observed that despite initially agreeing to present his defence, Kanu abandoned it, claiming there was no existing law under which he could be tried.

The judge stressed that the court had ensured a fair hearing, even personally urging Kanu to engage counsel and present his defence. Citing Supreme Court authorities, he stated that a court cannot compel a defendant to enter a defence if the opportunity is voluntarily abandoned. On this basis, Justice Omotosho fixed a date for judgment.

Kanu’s legal proceedings have been marked by numerous adjournments, appeals, counter-applications, and court orders, reflecting the complex nature of the case.