Nnamdi Kanu’s brother faults IPOB leader’s terrorism conviction, cites constitutional provision

Emmanuel Kanu, younger brother of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has questioned the legal basis of the separatist leader’s terrorism conviction.

According to Punch, Emmanuel raised the concerns in a statement issued on Tuesday while defending an exchange between his brother and James Omotosho, judge of a federal high court in Abuja, during the trial in 2025.

Emmanuel described the courtroom exchange as “a legitimate constitutional challenge rather than an act of defiance”.

He argued that the central issue in the case is whether the conviction complies with section 36(12) of the 1999 constitution, which provides that no person may be convicted of a criminal offence unless the offence and its penalty are prescribed by written law.

“Any criminal conviction must be anchored on a valid law in force at the time judgment is delivered,” Emmanuel was quoted as saying.

Emmanuel said during proceedings on November 20, 2025, the IPOB leader repeatedly asked the court to identify the specific law under which he was convicted.

He argued that although the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022 is Nigeria’s current terrorism legislation, the conviction was allegedly based on provisions linked to the repealed Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013.

“The prosecution’s case was initially instituted under the 2013 law and continued after its repeal through a savings provision contained in Section 98(3) of the 2022 Act,” he said.

“The question is whether the conviction meets the constitutional requirement that both the offence and punishment must be prescribed in a written law,” 

Emmanuel claimed that the court did not expressly identify a standalone offence-creating provision under the 2022 law as the basis for the conviction.

He said the defence had previously challenged the continued reliance on the repealed law and argued that any conviction founded on it would be invalid.

Emmanuel added that although the court acknowledged that repealed laws generally cease to have effect, it relied on transitional provisions to preserve the prosecution and allow the matter to proceed.

He said the issues would be tested at the court of appeal, where the defence is expected to argue that the prosecution must clearly identify the extant law supporting the conviction.

“If no such law is identified, the conviction could fail the constitutional test set out in Section 36(12) of the Constitution,” Emmanuel said.

He added that the appeal process would determine whether the conviction was grounded in a valid and existing law as required by the constitution.

In November 2025, Omotosho, the presiding judge, sentenced the IPOB leader to life imprisonment for terrorism charges.

Kanu was handed life imprisonment for counts one, four, five and six of the seven-count charges.

The IPOB leader got 20 years and five years’ imprisonment on counts three and seven, respectively.

Kanu is currently serving his sentence at the correctional centre in Sokoto.

In an appeal filed on February 4 at the court of appeal in Abuja, Kanu asked the appellate court to quash his terrorism conviction and the sentence.