A Nigerian Federal High Court in Abuja has sentenced Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), to life in prison on terrorism charges, concluding a contentious legal saga that has spanned nearly a decade. The verdict, delivered on Thursday, 20 November 2025, EAT, found Kanu guilty on all seven counts, which included terrorism, treasonable felony, and incitement to violence.

Presiding Judge James Omotosho stated that the prosecution had successfully proven that Kanu used broadcasts from his London-based station, Radio Biafra, to incite violence and killings as part of his campaign for an independent state for the Igbo people in southeastern Nigeria. While the prosecution had pushed for the death penalty, Judge Omotosho opted for a life sentence, noting that capital punishment is increasingly “frowned upon” globally and citing a need to “temper justice with mercy.” Kanu, who holds dual British and Nigerian citizenship, was also handed concurrent sentences of 20 years and 5 years for other charges, including membership of a proscribed organisation. The court ordered that he be held in protective custody and denied access to digital devices to prevent further incitement.

A Trial Marked by Defiance and Controversy

The trial was characterized by high drama. Kanu, 58, was not present for the verdict, having been ejected from the courtroom earlier for unruly behaviour after challenging the judge's authority. He had previously dismissed his legal team and opted to represent himself, consistently arguing that the Nigerian court lacked the jurisdiction to try him. Security was heavily reinforced around the courthouse in Abuja in anticipation of protests from his supporters.

Kanu's journey through the Nigerian legal system began with his first arrest in October 2015. He was granted bail in April 2017 but disappeared from Nigeria shortly after, only to be controversially rearrested in Kenya in June 2021 and brought back to Nigeria in a move his supporters termed an “extraordinary rendition.” This Kenyan connection has drawn the case into the East African sphere, highlighting the complex nature of cross-border security cooperation and its implications for political fugitives.

The Biafran Context and Regional Implications

Kanu is the most prominent contemporary figure advocating for the revival of the Republic of Biafra, which existed briefly from 1967 to 1970. The declaration of Biafran independence, primarily by the Igbo people, led to a brutal three-year civil war that resulted in the deaths of up to three million people, many from starvation. The historical grievances stemming from the war and perceptions of marginalisation have continued to fuel separatist sentiments in southeastern Nigeria.

IPOB, founded by Kanu in 2012, was designated a terrorist organization by the Nigerian government in 2017. The group has been blamed for a wave of deadly attacks on security forces and for enforcing disruptive “sit-at-home” orders every Monday in the southeast, which have crippled the region's economy and, according to a report by SBM Intelligence, cost the country billions of dollars.

For Kenya and East Africa, Kanu's case serves as a potent case study in the management of secessionist agitations. While direct ties are limited to his extradition, the verdict resonates with regions facing their own self-determination movements. The African Union has consistently upheld the principle of territorial integrity, often viewing secessionist calls as internal matters. Kenya itself has faced secessionist calls, from the post-independence Shifta War in the north to the more recent Mombasa Republican Council. The Nigerian court's firm stance against Kanu underscores a common, state-centric approach to such movements across the continent, prioritizing national unity over regional autonomy claims. Analysts suggest the conviction could either quell or further inflame separatist passions in Nigeria, a development that will be watched closely by governments across Africa navigating similar challenges of ethnic nationalism and statehood.