The Federal High Court in Abuja has sentenced the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, to life imprisonment after finding him guilty of multiple terrorism offences, violent incitement, issuing death threats, and ordering the destruction of government and diplomatic facilities across Nigeria. The landmark judgement, delivered by Justice James Omotosho, spans 144 pages and took more than five hours to read, marking one of the most consequential rulings in Nigeria’s judicial and political history. Kanu, who has been on trial for close to a decade, was convicted on several counts connected to his online broadcasts between 2018 and 2021, which the court described as direct triggers of widespread violence, killings and destruction across the South-East. The conviction signals the climax of a long-running legal and political confrontation between the Nigerian government and the Biafra secessionist movement.
This judgement brings to a close a trial that began in 2015, when Kanu was first arrested over his separatist agitation and his broadcasts on Radio Biafra. Over the last ten years, the case passed through four different judges, endured numerous adjournments and legal delays, and became a recurrent point of national debate and international attention. With the ruling delivered on 20 November 2025, Justice Omotosho firmly concluded the case, declaring that the prosecution had provided overwhelming, credible and unchallenged evidence linking Kanu to acts of terrorism. He stated that Kanu’s broadcasts functioned not merely as political statements but as “weapons wielded to intimidate, terrorise and annihilate communities.”
The court imposed a life sentence for terrorism-related offences after finding that Kanu repeatedly issued death threats against individuals and groups he labelled enemies, incited violence against members of the Nigerian security services, ordered the destruction of government infrastructure, and instructed his followers to target foreign embassies and diplomatic facilities in Nigeria. Justice Omotosho noted that these directives were not abstract calls but resulted in real-world consequences, including loss of lives, gruesome attacks on civilians, and widespread destruction of public property. He said the evidence showed a direct correlation between Kanu’s broadcasts and the wave of violence that engulfed parts of the South-East during the years under review. The infamous Monday sit-at-home order, enforced violently by IPOB loyalists, was highlighted as one of the most damaging outcomes of his directives. According to the court, this order, which Kanu issued and insisted be enforced weekly, led to killings, assaults, intimidation and the crippling of economic and social activities in the region.
In addition to the life sentence, Kanu received a 20-year jail term for being a member and leader of IPOB, a group that was officially designated a terrorist organisation in 2017. Justice Omotosho emphasised that the proscription of IPOB remained valid and legally binding, and that Kanu’s continued leadership of the organisation amounted to deliberate and sustained violation of a lawful court order. His refusal to acknowledge the legitimacy of the proscription strengthened the prosecution’s argument that he was operating with full awareness of the illegality of IPOB’s activities.
Kanu was also handed a five-year jail term for smuggling a radio transmitter into Nigeria in 2015. The transmitter was used to operate Radio Biafra and to broadcast the controversial and incendiary messages that formed the core of the prosecution’s evidence. This act, the court said, demonstrated premeditation and intent to undermine Nigeria’s security architecture through illicit communication channels.
DOWNLOAD THE FULL DOCUMENT here
A significant factor in the outcome of the case was that the prosecution’s evidence went entirely unchallenged. The Federal Government tendered extensive audio and video recordings of Radio Biafra broadcasts from 2018 to 2021, as well as intelligence reports, witness testimonies and documentation of attacks allegedly linked to Kanu’s directives. Five witnesses testified in court, detailing how Kanu’s words translated into violent actions by his followers. Because Kanu refused to enter a defence, none of the evidence was contested, cross-examined or rebutted.
Kanu’s refusal to defend himself became one of the defining features of the final phase of the trial. After dismissing his entire legal team, he opted to represent himself in court but repeatedly insisted that the terrorism charges were invalid because, according to him, they were filed under a repealed version of the Terrorism Prevention Act. Justice Omotosho ruled that this argument had no basis in law. After several warnings and opportunities to present a defence, the court foreclosed his right to do so on 7 November 2025. In the final judgement, the judge described Kanu’s position as a misinterpretation of the law rooted in ignorance and stated that his refusal to defend himself left the prosecution’s case “uncontroverted, authoritative and compelling.”
