Judge to Deliver Verdict on Kanu's Terrorism Trial in His Absence, Reason Emerges
- Justice James Omotosho had ruled that judgment in Nnamdi Kanu’s terrorism related trial would be delivered without the defendant present
- Kanu had been ordered out of the courtroom after he shouted at the judge and disrupted the proceedings
- The court had dismissed three new motions filed by Kanu, declaring them unmeritorious since the matter had already been fixed for judgment
Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled that the judgment in the terrorism related case involving Nnamdi Kanu will be handed down without the defendant present.
The decision followed a disruption during Thursday’s proceedings when Kanu challenged the court and interrupted the session. Security officials escorted him out after the judge ordered his removal.
The court had convened for the continuation of the long running trial when tensions rose.
Earlier, Justice Omotosho dismissed three new applications filed by Kanu, describing them as lacking merit since the matter had already been set for judgment. The filings were rejected before the court attempted to proceed to its scheduled ruling.
Source: Twitter
Judge rejects fresh applications
Kanu objected to the court’s plan to move ahead. He insisted the process could not continue because he had not submitted his final written address. He raised his voice as he made the claim and accused Justice Omotosho of bias.
According to him, the judge "did not know the law", a remark that caused a brief pause in the courtroom.
The confrontation led to a direct order from the bench for security personnel to remove the IPOB leader. Once he was taken away, Justice Omotosho reconvened the session and announced that the judgment would proceed without Kanu’s attendance.
The ruling, initially meant to be delivered on November 20, will now be handed down in line with the court’s directive despite the defendant’s outburst.
Nnamdi Kanu’s decade-long court case
Nnamdi Kanu’s court case has spanned a decade, marked by arrests, bail, disappearance, and re-arrest, making it one of Nigeria’s most prolonged and politically sensitive trials.
Nnamdi Kanu, member of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), first entered Nigeria’s legal spotlight in 2015 when he was arrested in Lagos on charges of treasonable felony and terrorism.
Source: Twitter
His detention lasted about 18 months before a federal court granted him bail on health grounds. Following his release from Kuje Prison, Kanu’s case took a dramatic turn in 2017 when he disappeared after security forces raided his home in Umuahia, Abia State.
In 2021, Kanu was controversially re-arrested abroad and returned to Nigeria, sparking widespread debate about the legality of his extradition. Since then, he has remained in custody, facing terrorism-related charges, including alleged incitement and running an unlawful organisation.
His legal team consistently challenged the competence of the charges, arguing that some laws underpinning them had been repealed.
Over the years, his trial has been characterised by delays, appeals, and jurisdictional disputes, with the Court of Appeal intervening at several points to expand, suspend, or redirect proceedings. Observers noted that the case tested Nigeria’s justice system, particularly in handling politically sensitive prosecutions.
The saga of Nnamdi Kanu’s legal battles has therefore been defined not only by the charges themselves but also by the political and constitutional questions they raised.
Kanu asks appeal court to stop justice from delivering judgement
Legit.ng earlier reported that the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has asked the Court of Appeal, Abuja, to stop Justice Omotosho from delivering judgment on his case on November 20, 2025.
Kanu asked the appellate court to stay further proceedings in his trial by Justice Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Source: Legit.ng
