News
‘Convicted for Mere Words’: Kanu’s Lawyer Says Life Sentence Driven by Ethnic, Political Bias
In a fiery and immediate rejection of the ruling, Nnamdi Kanu’s lead counsel, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, has condemned the Federal High Court judgment sentencing the IPOB leader to life imprisonment, describing it as “a conviction based on mere words, politics, and ethnic bias.” Ejimakor insisted that the verdict “will live in infamy” and vowed it would be overturned on appeal.
The outburst followed a dramatic conclusion to a case that has gripped the nation for years. On Thursday, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, convicted Kanu on three terrorism-related charges and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The decision comes four years after Kanu’s controversial arrest in Kenya and his return to Nigeria in what his legal team has consistently described as an illegal extraordinary rendition.
Kanu, who faced a seven-count terrorism charge filed by the Department of State Services (DSS), was not present in court during the sentencing. He had maintained that the court lacked the jurisdiction to proceed against him on the terrorism allegations.
Justice Omotosho ruled that Kanu’s online broadcasts — including sit-at-home directives in the South-East and alleged threats of violence — amounted to acts of terrorism. The judge also held that the IPOB leader, in one of his broadcasts, admitted to being a member of a group that the Federal High Court had previously proscribed and designated as a terrorist organisation.
But Ejimakor insisted the conviction had no grounding in evidence or logic.
“This is the only day I have witnessed a man being convicted for mere puffery — for what he said with his mouth, not what he did with his hands,” he said. “The verdict is not consistent with the evidence laid before the court. The sentence is overbroad, cruel, and unusual.”
He argued that no link had been established between Kanu’s broadcasts and any act of violence.
“How can you convict a man for making a broadcast from an unnamed location when he never tied that broadcast to any single incident — not even someone slapping another person, let alone terrorism?” he asked. “No evidence was laid. I do not know where this verdict can be grounded in law, logic, or fact.”
Accusing the court of capitulating to political considerations and ethnic prejudice, Ejimakor declared:
“The judgment is not based on law or facts. It is based on politics and tribal, primordial sentiments — simply because Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is Igbo. Today, we saw an Igbo man being trampled upon, and by God Almighty, we are not going to allow it.”
He vowed that the defense team would immediately head to the Court of Appeal, and, if necessary, pursue the matter up to the Supreme Court.
“By God Almighty, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu will not remain convicted. This judgment will be overturned,” he said.
Ejimakor maintained that self-determination is not a crime and warned that the ruling sets a dangerous precedent.
“Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is not a terrorist. He is a man pursuing change. To pursue a separate nation is not a crime. Yet in Nigeria today, it appears mere words now amount to terrorism,” he said.
The sentencing marks a new and contentious chapter in Kanu’s long-running legal and political battle — a saga that has sparked protests, security operations, and deep national debates since 2015. His legal team is expected to file a formal appeal in the coming days.
By Kayode Sanni-Arewa
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has affirmed the November 14 judgment by Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court, restraining the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) from proceeding with its November 15–16 national convention in Ibadan without giving former Jigawa State Governor, Sule Lamido, the opportunity to participate as a chairmanship candidate.
In a unanimous judgment, a three-member panel held that the PDP’s convention, held in defiance of a valid subsisting Federal High Court order, was contemptuous and showed disrespect to the court.
The court noted that it was undisputed that the PDP conducted the convention despite an existing order directing it to allow Lamido’s participation.
It rejected the party’s argument that it acted in compliance with a judgment from another court of coordinate jurisdiction, emphasizing that “it is not for any party in a case to decide which order to obey or ignore.”
The court stated that the PDP should have either applied for a stay of execution of the judgment or filed an appeal against it before proceeding.
Condemning the party’s contemptuous conduct, the appellate court held that the trial court acted correctly in assuming jurisdiction over Lamido’s case and granting the reliefs he sought.
The court dismissed the PDP’s appeal for lacking merit and awarded N2 million in costs against the party.
By Kayode Sanni-Arewa
Finally, Zamfara State Governor, Dauda Lawal has defected from PDP to ruling APC.
The announcement was made by his Deputy, Mani Malam Mumuni today in Gusau.
Lawal is reportedly in Saudi Arabia.
Details shortly…
By Kayode Sanni-Arewa
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has upheld the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which on October 31, 2025 restrained the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, from recognizing the outcome of the 2025 National Convention of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.
The National Convention was conducted between November 15 and 16 in Ibadan, Oyo State capital.
Delivering judgment in an appeal against the Federal High Court decision, Justice Uchechukwu Onyemenam held that PDP violated Constitutional provisions required before such convention can become valid.
Among others, Justice Onyemenam said no valid convention notice was served on the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC as required by law.
The appellate Court also held that valid congresses were not held in more than 14 states as provideded by law before 2025 convention was put in place.
Justice Onyemenam held that the case of the aggrieved PDP members who instituted the case against the party was not an internal affairs of the party as erroneously held but the desire to force INEC to comply with its statutory functions in relation to party conventions.
Having failed to comply with the relevant laws, the Court of Appeal held that the Federal High Court was right in assuming jurisdiction and granting restraining order against INEC from accepting or recognising the outcome of the PDP 2025 national convention.
“Non compliance with the 1999 Constitution, Electoral Act 2022 and party Constitution and Guidelines are at the hearts of democratic governance and compliance must be strictly enforced in the interest of democracy”
Justice James Omotosho had on October 31, 2025 issued the order that restrained INEC from recognizing the outcome of the Ibadan convention until all provisions of the laws are complied with.
The judge predicated the decision on the grounds that the PDP failed to comply with relevant conditions and laws for the conduct of such conventions.
The judge had held that evidence provided by the electoral umpire and some of the aggrieved PDP members showed that congresses were not held in some states of the federation in breach of the law.
In addition, the lower court had also held that the signing of notices and correspondence of the PDP by its National Chairman without the National Secretary violated the law and consequently made such notices and correspondences a nullity.
Besides, Justice Omotosho held that the PDP failed to issue the mandatory 21 days notice of meetings and congresses to enable INEC carry out its mandatory duty of monitoring such meetings and congresses.
Justice Omotosho held that the failure of the PDP to comply with the law has put the then planned convention in jeopardy, and subsequently advised the PDP to do the necessary before going ahead with the election.
He therefore restrained INEC from receiving, publishing or recognizing the outcome of the convention slated for Ibadan, until the law has been complied with.
Three aggrieved members of the party who instituted the case are Austin Nwachukwu (Imo PDP chairman), Amah Abraham Nnanna (Abia PDP chairman) and Turnah Alabh George (PDP Secretary, South-South).
The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2120/2025 was instituted on their behalf by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria SAN, Joseph Daudu.
The plaintiffs had asked the court to stop the planned November 15 and 16, 2025 National Convention of PDP, scheduled for Ibadan in Oyo State, where new national officers are expected to be elected.
The nine defendants are Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), PDP, Samuel Anyanwu, National Secretary of the party, Umar Baturrle, National Organizing Secretary of the party, NWC and NEC of the party, Ambassador Umar Iliya Damagum, Ali Odefa and Emmanuel Ogidi.
Appeal Court affirms judgement against PDP over Lamido’s Ibadan convention exclusion
BREAKING! Finally, Zamfara gov, Lawal defects from PDP to APC
Breaking,: PDP Leadership Dispute: Appeal Court nullifies Ibadan Convention
-
News20 hours agoIran Names Khamenei’s Son As New Supreme Leader
-
News20 hours agoIran’s next supreme leader won’t ‘last long’ without my approval — Trump
-
News20 hours agoNLC raises alarm over alleged N20bn ‘emergency’ contract scam in TCN
-
Economy20 hours agoNNPCL increases fuel for second time in less than 24 hours
-
Politics20 hours agoIbadan convention: Appeal Court decides PDP’s fate today
-
News20 hours agoIWD: Tinubu Celebrates Nigerian Women, Promises Enabling Environment For Them
-
News18 hours agoSpeaker Abbas Urges Caution Over Planned Single-Use Plastic Ban
-
News16 hours agoBREAKING: HoCS building in Abuja engulfed by fire(Video)