THIS DAWN — Justice James Kolawole Omotosho, the current presiding judge in the ongoing trial of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, is a judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division.
His judicial career and previous rulings have drawn both attention and controversy, given his involvement in several politically sensitive cases across Nigeria.
Background and Education
Justice Omotosho was reportedly born on 21 July 1966 in Ajegunle, Lagos State, though his family originates from Ijemo-Abeokuta in Ogun State.
He is of Yoruba ethnic descent.
His educational journey began with a National Certificate of Education (NCE) in Economics and Business Management from the Lagos State College of Education, Ijanikin.
He later obtained a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) degree from Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, before attending the Nigerian Law School, where he was called to the Bar.
While detailed information about his early legal practice remains limited, reports indicate that he worked as a private legal practitioner prior to his appointment to the Federal High Court.
He was appointed to the bench on 12 February 2015, and since then, has presided over numerous high-profile matters involving constitutional interpretation, political disputes, and governance issues.
Judicial Career and Notable Cases
Justice Omotosho’s court has become a focal point for several politically charged cases, especially those connected to Rivers State politics.
His rulings have often sparked public debate, with some commentators accusing him of issuing decisions that appear to favour particular political actors.
Critics have coined the phrase “à la carte law” to describe what they perceive as an inconsistent application of judicial principles in his courtroom.
One of his most discussed cases was Suit No. FHC/PH/CS/53/2025, concerning a challenge to an emergency proclamation in Rivers State.
In his ruling, Justice Omotosho held that Section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution does not prescribe a specific method for the National Assembly to pass a joint resolution approving a state of emergency.
This interpretation drew criticism from legal analysts, who argued that it was unconventional and politically slanted.
He also awarded costs of ₦9 million against the claimants, a move some observers saw as excessive.
Justice Omotosho’s name has also appeared in connection with other politically sensitive matters, including injunctions restraining opposition parties from participating in elections and rulings on disputes within the Rivers State House of Assembly.
In some of these cases, critics allege that his court granted ex parte orders or expedited reliefs without giving adequate hearing to opposing parties.
Current Role in the Nnamdi Kanu Trial
Justice Omotosho is now presiding over Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Nnamdi Kanu (Case No. FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015), one of Nigeria’s most closely watched criminal proceedings.
On 20 November 2025, he is scheduled to deliver judgment in the matter after ruling that the defendant had effectively waived his right to defence by refusing to enter a plea or present evidence.
The court also declined to accept further written addresses from counsel.
Defence lawyers have protested this approach, arguing that the judge ought to hear pending motions — particularly those challenging the court’s jurisdiction and the validity of the charge — before proceeding to judgment.
They contend that his handling of the case raises concerns about fair hearing and due process, echoing broader debates about his judicial style.
Public Perception and Legal Implications
Justice Omotosho’s conduct in the Kanu trial is under intense scrutiny.
His reputation for issuing firm, expedited orders suggests that he prefers to avoid procedural delays.
However, legal analysts warn that such rigidity can heighten perceptions of bias, especially in cases with strong political or ethnic overtones.
Although commentary critical of his judgments does not carry legal weight, public perception plays a significant role in shaping confidence in the judiciary.
The Kanu case, already fraught with political sensitivities, places Justice Omotosho at the centre of a delicate balance between judicial efficiency and constitutional fairness.
As the 20 November 2025 judgment date approaches, observers across Nigeria and beyond are watching closely.
Whether Justice Omotosho’s decision reinforces public faith in the independence of the judiciary — or deepens skepticism about its impartiality — remains to be seen.
