-
Nnamdi Kanu appeals life sentence, challenging terrorism conviction handed down by a Federal High Court
-
IPOB leader files 22 grounds of appeal, citing constitutional breaches and procedural failures
-
Defence faults trial over 2017 military invasion, says Kanu’s absence was forced, not voluntary
The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has formally appealed his conviction and life sentence imposed by the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja.
Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, disclosed this development on Wednesday via a post on his verified X (formerly Twitter) handle, confirming that the appeal was filed on February 4, 2026.
ATTENTION: Click “HERE” to join our WhatsApp group and receive News updates directly on your WhatsApp!
Ejimakor described the filing as a landmark legal move, stating that Kanu personally authorised the appeal against both his conviction and sentence.
According to the Notice of Appeal filed at the Court of Appeal, Abuja, Kanu is contesting the terrorism conviction and multiple life sentences imposed on him by Justice James Omotosho on November 20, 2025.
Recall that the Federal High Court convicted the IPOB leader on seven terrorism-related charges, including alleged inflammatory broadcasts, incitement, directives linked to violent acts, and the unlawful importation of a radio transmitter.
Most of the counts attracted life imprisonment, with the court ordering that all sentences should run concurrently.
However, Kanu’s legal team insists that the appeal is far from routine.
Although the Notice of Appeal contains 22 grounds, the defence said these were carefully distilled from an extensive legal review that initially identified over 1,000 alleged procedural and substantive defects in the trial process.
READ ALSO: Don’t publicise our discussions after visiting me in prison – Nnamdi Kanu warns
The lawyers explained that these were first reduced to 101 core infractions and further streamlined to comply with appellate rules and avoid excessive repetition.
According to the defence, the strategy is to present the appellate court with a clear demonstration of what it described as a systemic failure of justice, rather than burdening the court with excessive documentation.
A major plank of the appeal challenges the trial court’s failure to address the legal implications of the 2017 military invasion of Kanu’s home during Operation Python Dance II, an incident that reportedly resulted in deaths and widespread destruction.
The defence argued that Kanu’s subsequent absence from Nigeria was a direct response to state violence and threats to his life, but was wrongly characterised during trial as voluntary “flight” to justify adverse conclusions against him.
The appeal further alleges multiple violations of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, including the court’s failure to hear a pending preliminary objection, refusal to determine a bail application, and the delivery of judgment without allowing the defence to file a final written address.
