Nnamdi Kanu Files Appeal Against Terrorism Conviction, Cites Due Process and Evidence Gaps

• IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu has filed an appeal against his terrorism conviction and life sentences, raising concerns over due process, evidentiary gaps and the application of repealed laws.

The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, challenging his terrorism conviction and life sentences imposed by the Federal High Court.

Court documents show that the appeal was filed on February 4, 2026, following Kanu’s conviction on November 20, 2025, on seven terrorism-related counts. The charges included allegations bordering on unlawful broadcasts, incitement, directives linked to bomb-making, and the illegal importation of a radio transmitter. Most of the counts attracted life imprisonment, with the trial court ordering that the sentences run concurrently.

According to the appeal filed by his legal team, the challenge goes beyond a routine post-conviction process. Although the notice lists 22 grounds of appeal, the defence described it as a streamlined presentation of what it said were extensive procedural and legal defects identified during a detailed review of the trial.

The grounds of appeal raise concerns about alleged violations of Kanu’s right to fair hearing, including claims that pending applications were not determined, and that judgment was delivered without allowing the defence to file a final written address. The appeal also questions the trial court’s treatment of Kanu’s absence from Nigeria following the 2017 military operation at his residence, which the defence argues was a forced displacement rather than voluntary flight.

On the issue of evidence, the appeal contends that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The defence argues that no victims testified to acts of violence or intimidation, no witnesses confirmed being influenced by the alleged broadcasts, and no physical evidence was produced to substantiate claims relating to explosives.

DON’T MISS: Sit-at-Home Shuts Down Anambra as 85% Compliance Reported Across State

The appeal further alleges that the trial court relied on facts not pleaded in the charge sheet or proved during trial, including references to attacks on foreign diplomatic missions. It also challenges aspects of the conviction on statutory grounds, arguing that some counts were based on laws that had been repealed before judgment or were statute-barred at the time of conviction.

The Court of Appeal is expected to receive the full record of proceedings from the lower court before fixing dates for hearing. Legal observers say the case is likely to renew debate on due process, evidentiary standards and the application of terrorism laws in Nigeria.