The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has forcefully rejected the recent ruling by the Federal High Court in Abuja, which imposed a life sentence on its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, based on seven terrorism-related charges.
In a statement released on Friday, the 21st of November, 2025, by IPOB spokesperson Emma Powerful, the separatist group asserted that Kanu is innocent of any crime recognized under Nigerian law. IPOB contends that Kanu’s actions constitute mere agitation for self-determination, a right it insists is protected by various international conventions.
Powerful specifically criticized the decision rendered by Justice James Omotosho, alleging that the judge failed to correctly apply Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution. This constitutional provision stipulates that: “a person shall not be convicted of an offence unless it is defined in a written law.”
IPOB declared its intention to meticulously dissect the judgment for the global community. “The IPOB wishes to inform the global community, diplomatic missions, international media, and lovers of freedom that we shall, in the coming days and weeks, lay bare the fundamental defects, contradictions, and illegalities that define the recent ruling issued by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.”
READ ALSO: Nnamdi Kanu and the Question of Justice: Between Law, Politics and the Nigerian State
The group emphasized the absence of any incriminating evidence directly linking Kanu to violence or terrorism: “For the avoidance of doubt, no gun, no grenade, no GPMG, no explosive, and no attack plan was ever found on Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. None. No witness, civilian or military, ever testified before any court at any stage that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu committed any offence known to Nigerian or international law. This is an undeniable fact.”
Self-Determination is ‘Not a Crime’
IPOB maintains that the Nigerian government is attempting to criminalize a protected human right. The organization referenced multiple international treaties to support its stance:
“The only thing the Federal Government continues to criminalise is self-determination, a right guaranteed under Article 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Article 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.”
The statement concluded with a sharp distinction between political activism and violence: “Self-determination is a protected right, not a crime. Agitation is not terrorism, and requesting a referendum is not a weapon.”
Furthermore, IPOB argued that the significant escalation of insecurity in the South-East region occurred while Kanu was in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS), suggesting that incidents during this period cannot be legitimately blamed on the jailed leader.