The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, challenging his conviction and multiple sentences imposed by the Federal High Court.
Kanu is asking the appellate court to set aside the judgment delivered on November 20, 2025, arguing that his trial was fundamentally flawed and amounted to a miscarriage of justice.
He was convicted on seven counts, including terrorism-related offences, and sentenced to five life terms in addition to other prison sentences.
In the notice of appeal dated February 4, 2026, Kanu listed several grounds on which he is contesting the judgment, alleging serious legal and constitutional breaches during the trial process.
One of the major issues raised is what Kanu described as a “foundational disruption of the original trial process” following the 2017 military operation at his Afara-Ukwu residence in Umuahia, Abia State. According to him, the operation, which forced him to flee the country at the time, fundamentally affected the continuity and legality of the proceedings.
He argued that the trial court failed to properly address the legal implications of that disruption before resuming the case.
Kanu also faulted the Federal High Court for proceeding with the trial and ultimately delivering judgment while his preliminary objection challenging the competence of the proceedings remained unresolved.
He argued that the court was duty-bound to determine the objection first, as it went to the root of the court’s jurisdiction to continue with the case.
In another ground of appeal, the IPOB leader criticised the trial court for delivering judgment while his bail application was still pending before the court. He contended that the failure to determine the bail application before concluding the trial breached his right to fair hearing and adversely affected the overall integrity of the proceedings.
A key plank of Kanu’s appeal is his claim that he was convicted under a law that had already been repealed before judgment was delivered.
He argued that the learned trial judge erred in law by convicting and sentencing him under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013, despite the fact that the law had been repealed by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
According to Kanu, the 2022 Act had come into force before the court delivered its judgment, making reliance on the repealed 2013 legislation unlawful and fatal to the conviction.
Kanu further alleged that his retrial amounted to double jeopardy, contrary to Section 36(9) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). He argued that he was prosecuted again on facts and issues that had earlier been nullified by the Court of Appeal, insisting that the subsequent trial violated his constitutional protection against being tried twice for the same offence.
He maintained that the cumulative effect of the alleged errors — including unresolved objections, pending applications, reliance on a repealed law, and constitutional breaches — rendered the entire trial unfair and the conviction unsustainable.
The IPOB leader is therefore urging the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal, quash his conviction, and set aside the sentences imposed by the Federal High Court.
The Court is yet to fix a date for the hearing of the appeal.
