Nnamdi Kanu’s lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, has denounced the life sentence handed to the IPOB leader, insisting that “mere utterances cannot be terrorism” and vowing to challenge the judgment at the Court of Appeal.
The lawyer described the verdict as a deep stain on Nigeria’s justice system, arguing that the court punished speech rather than conduct and delivered a ruling that defies both logic and law.
While addressing journalists after the sentencing, Ejimakor said the judgment represented a dark moment for the country’s judiciary.
He declared that “today we forever live in infamy,” stressing that the conviction was based on statements allegedly made by Kanu, not on any proven act of violence.
According to him, the prosecution failed to link the broadcasts to any specific incident, yet the court still imposed one of the harshest penalties available.
He argued that the ruling was inconsistent with the evidence presented, insisting that no witness or material fact tied Kanu’s commentary to physical harm or organised attacks.
“This is the only day I have witnessed a man being convicted for what he said with his mouth, not for anything he did with his hands,” he said.
“How can you convict a man for making broadcasts from an unnamed location when not a single act of violence was connected to those words?”
Ejimakor accused the court of embracing politics over fairness, claiming that ethnic sentiment and pressure influenced the outcome.
He asserted that Kanu was being targeted because he is Igbo and had become, in his view, an easy figure to suppress for political convenience.
“An Igbo man has become the person in Nigeria that should be trampled upon,” he said. “But we will not allow it. Nobody is going to trample on Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.”
The lawyer added that self-determination, the core of Kanu’s advocacy, is recognised globally as a political aspiration, not a criminal act.
“To pursue a separate nation is not a crime. If someone says something provocative, does that amount to terrorism in the Federal Republic of Nigeria?” he asked.
He condemned the sentence as “overbroad, cruel and unusual,” alleging that it set a dangerous precedent for free expression in Nigeria.
According to him, convicting citizens for speech alone would erode civil liberties and complicate already fragile national debates about identity, governance and regional grievances.
Ejimakor confirmed that the legal team would file an appeal immediately, expressing confidence that the Court of Appeal would review the evidence more critically.
“The next court sits as a jury,” he said. “We are certain the justices will agree that what happened today was a travesty of justice.”
The sentencing, one of the most consequential rulings in Nigeria’s recent political and judicial history, is expected to trigger intense national reaction, particularly in the southeast where Kanu commands significant influence.
The legal battle, meanwhile, appears far from over, setting the stage for another high-stakes confrontation in the appellate courts.