Nigeria reacts sharply as Nnamdi Kanu’s life sentence deepens debate over justice, security, and political rights.
The sentencing of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, Nnamdi Kanu, to life imprisonment has triggered sharp and contrasting reactions across Nigeria’s political and legal circles.
Abaribe Says Outcome Was Expected
Former Senate Minority Leader, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, criticised the verdict, saying the judgment did not surprise many in the South East.
In a statement issued by his media adviser, Uchenna Awom, Abaribe argued that the outcome had been “foretold” since the Federal Government declined appeals to extend amnesty to Kanu, as it had done for armed groups in other regions.
He said the development strengthened the perception that justice is not applied evenly in Nigeria.
“Negotiations and peace deals have been offered to violent groups in the North and ex-militants in the South South, yet the same opportunity is denied the South East,” he said.
Abaribe urged residents to remain calm and law-abiding while awaiting the next steps from the Federal Government, now under President Bola Tinubu.
“We place the fate of this matter in the hands of the President,” he added.
Defence Vows Appeal
Kanu’s counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, has vowed to challenge the ruling, describing the sentencing as a “travesty of justice.”
Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja sentenced Kanu to life imprisonment on four terrorism charges, alongside terms of 20 years and five years on other counts, all to run concurrently.
READ ALSO: Federal High Court Sentences Nnamdi Kanu to Life Imprisonment
Ejimakor told journalists that the conviction punished Kanu for his words rather than proven criminal action.
“This is the only day I have seen a man convicted for what he said, not what he did,” he said.
He argued that no evidence linked Kanu’s broadcasts to violence, insisting the case would be taken to the Court of Appeal and to the Supreme Court if necessary.
The ruling has revived conversations on the limits of political expression, separatist campaigns, state security, and how the justice system responds to dissent.
Kanu was first arrested in 2015 on treason and terrorism charges. He fled in 2017 while on bail and was later re-arrested in Kenya in 2021 under disputed circumstances described by his legal team as “extraordinary rendition.”
Prosecutors expanded the accusations to 15 counts, including terrorism and incitement, while his lawyers maintain that procedural issues and jurisdictional questions undermine the trial’s legitimacy.
FG Counsel: Judgment Shows No One Above the Law
But the Federal Government’s position sharply contrasts these views.
Lead prosecuting counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo, praised the judgment, saying it demonstrated the supremacy of the law.
“Let it be a warning: those who think they are bigger than Nigeria should understand that Nigeria is bigger than every one of us,” he said.
Awomolo said the ruling should reassure Nigerians that the judicial system can effectively address threats to national security.
“The law will take its course to deal with miscreants, terrorists and criminals,” he added.
He also commended the judiciary, saying the verdict helped protect the country from what he described as the “oppression” of IPOB.
A Case That Continues to Shape National Debate
Kanu’s trial has been one of Nigeria’s most contentious legal battles, shaping discussions around federal power, civil liberties, separatist agitation, and the limits of free political expression.
With appeals set to begin, the case is far from over, and the national conversation it has sparked is likely to intensify in the months ahead.
About the Author
