THIS DAWN — The controversial judgment delivered by Justice Omotosho against the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has sparked renewed global debate, with the international community overwhelmingly rejecting the Nigerian government’s attempt to classify Kanu as a terrorist.
Instead, his profile as a separatist leader has risen sharply—an outcome that critics say the Nigerian state inadvertently engineered through a “grave miscarriage of justice.”
According to Eastern Nigeria Development Association (ENDA) President, Charles Obinna Chukwunaru, a comprehensive survey of international media coverage following the ruling shows a consistent portrayal of Kanu as a victim of persecution rather than a security threat.
Chukwunaru argues that the verdict has strengthened Kanu’s global legitimacy and hardened international scrutiny of Nigeria’s human rights record.
The ordeals of Nnamdi Kanu
Kanu, who launched a popular campaign for a Biafra referendum, survived a 2017 military operation on his residence under former President Muhammadu Buhari.
After fleeing the country, he was abducted in Kenya in June 2021 and forcibly returned to Nigeria—a move condemned globally.
On June 24, 2025, Justice E.C. Mwita of the Kenyan High Court ruled that the abduction and extraordinary rendition were illegal, awarding Kanu KSh10 million (about $70,000) in compensation.
Despite similar judgments in Nigeria—including his discharge and acquittal by the Court of Appeal in 2022—Kanu has remained in custody.
Chukwunaru described the situation as “a deliberate subversion of the rule of law.”
He further notes that IPOB is legally registered in the United Kingdom and widely supported within the diaspora.
Is IPOB a terrorist organization?
Both the U.S. State Department (2017) and the U.K. government (2022) affirm that IPOB is not designated as a terrorist organization.
Nigeria’s terrorism designation, made through an ex parte order, has been declared unconstitutional by some courts but remains entangled in appellate litigation.
Chukwunaru urged Eastern Nigerians to remain calm despite the perceived provocation, warning that those celebrating the verdict “do so prematurely.”
He invoked the moral principle that “when conscienceless power collides with a powerless conscience, the former may laugh first, but the latter will ultimately prevail.”
While distancing himself from some of Kanu’s past rhetoric, Chukwunaru condemned what he called a “collusion between a conscienceless judge and the Nigerian state” to impose a life sentence on a man whose actions largely involved radio broadcasts.
Chukwunaru contrasted this with government negotiations and rehabilitation programs for jihadist militants.
He argued that such double standards reinforce perceptions of systemic Igbophobia and intensify global calls for a Biafra referendum.
