IPOB Leader Kanu Files 22-Ground Appeal Against Life Sentence

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 in Abuja.

Kanu’s counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, disclosed the development on Wednesday via his verified X (formerly Twitter) handle, stating that the IPOB leader personally filed the appeal on February 4, 2026.

According to the legal team, the Notice of Appeal was lodged at the Court of Appeal, Abuja, challenging Kanu’s conviction on terrorism-related charges and the life sentences handed down on November 20, 2025, by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court.

Kanu was convicted on seven terrorism-related counts, including allegations bordering on unlawful broadcasts, incitement, directives allegedly linked to bomb-making, and the unlawful importation of a radio transmitter. The trial court imposed life imprisonment on most of the counts, ordering that the sentences run concurrently.

However, the defence described the appeal as far more than a routine post-conviction filing. Although the Notice of Appeal contains 22 grounds, Kanu’s legal team said the issues raised represent what they termed a “highly compressed” summary of extensive legal objections.

According to the defence, an initial review of the trial proceedings identified over 1,000 alleged procedural and legal defects. These were reportedly streamlined into 101 core infractions and ultimately distilled into 22 grounds of appeal in compliance with appellate court rules and to avoid unnecessary verbosity.

The defence said the strategy is aimed at presenting what it described as cumulative systemic failures in the trial process, rather than overwhelming the appellate court with numerous filings.

Among the key issues raised in the appeal is the trial court’s alleged failure to address the legal implications of the 2017 military operation at Kanu’s residence in Abia State, popularly known as “Operation Python Dance II.” The operation reportedly resulted in casualties and property destruction.

Kanu’s legal team argued that his subsequent departure from Nigeria was a compelled response to the military action and not a voluntary flight from justice, as was portrayed during the trial. The defence contends that adverse inferences were drawn against him on that basis.

The appeal also alleges violations of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which guarantees the right to fair hearing. Specifically, the defence claims that the trial court failed to hear and determine a pending preliminary objection, left a bail application unresolved, and delivered judgment without affording the defence the opportunity to file a final written address.

The Court of Appeal is expected to fix a date for hearing after the transmission of the trial records and completion of procedural formalities.

The outcome of the appeal is likely to attract significant national and international attention, given the high-profile nature of the case and its broader political implications.