Terrorism Charges: Nnamdi Kanu To Know Fate, October 10

By Suleiman Anyalewechi

An Abuja Federal High Court on Friday, July 18, 2025, reserved judgment  for October 10, 2025 on the no-case submission made by the leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra IPOB Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

Kanu, who has been standing trial on charges bordering on  terrorism since 2021 on  Friday opened  his defence with a no-case plea through his counsel, Kanu Agabi, SAN.

The Federal Government which has been prosecuting the IPOB leader on alleged terrorist activities at the  Court sitting in June, closed its case after calling about five witnesses.

The Presiding Judge, Justice James Omotosho adjourned proceedings to October 10, after hearing arguments from  both parties.

The defence counsel in his submission urged the Court to discharge and acquit his client, Kanu, after challenging the validity of the prosecution’s charges.

Agabi, a former Attorney General, and Minister of Justice, argued that  none of the witnesses had testified that Kanu was responsible for inciting violence against the people as being argued by the prosecution.

Agabi further argued that all the five witnesses ( DSS operatives)  called by the  prosecution, apart from not blaming Kanu for the eruption of violence, also, admitted that their roles were limited to only obtaining statements from the IPOB leader.

The IPOB leader’s Counsel contended that no conclusive investigation was conducted on the statements allegedly made by Kanu, and that no investigative reports were also tendered before the Court in that regard.

Agabi, who further posited that Kanu only called on the people to defend themselves in the face of rampant killings, also, contended that he  was only merely being boastful when he was alleged to have threatened to “bring the world down”.

The defence Counsel was of the view that Kanu’s position that the people should defend themselves is a constitutional right which has been reechoed by many prominent Nigerians, including General Theophilus Yakubu Danjuma rtd.

He equally picked hole in the endless detention of Kanu, arguing that all extant laws, both local and international, are against solitary confinement of people.

The defence counsel was of the view that such mere piece of propaganda and boastful talk should not be cited as a veritable evidence of terrorism against the IPOB leader.

Agabi, in conclusion, argued that the terrorism charges preferred against Nnamdi Kanu by the Federal Government could not be proven during the trial.

Consequently, he urged the court to dismiss the charges, discharge and acquit his client as there are no sufficient grounds to continue with the trial.

Earlier, the prosecution’s legal team led by Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, had prayed the court to dismiss the  defendant’s no-case submission for lacking in merit.

The prosecution insisted that the detained IPOB leader had made a broadcast on Radio Biafra, during which he openly called for the break-up of Nigeria as a country.

In addition, Awomolo contended that apart from threatening the existence of the country, Kanu also expressed the intention to establish the Republic of Biafra.

The prosecution counsel prayed the Court not to perceive Kanu’s position as just a mere and empty threat, but to view it as a deliberate and dangerous plot to disintegrate Nigeria ,as well as sow  seeds of violence and widespread fear among the citizens of Nigeria.

He argued that Kanu’s threat of ” bringing down the world” was not an empty one, but serious national security challenge which should not be handled with a kid glove.

Awomolo contended that the IPOB leader in his Radio Biafra broadcast directed his listeners/followers to target, and kill police personnel, security operatives, and their family members.

The Prosecution lead counsel argued that owing to Kanu’s message, over 170 security officials were killed.

“The defendant made a broadcast in which he proudly declared himself as the IPOB leader, even though he knew that the group had been proscribed.

He claimed that the world would come to a standstill. The Nigerian law prohibits inciting statements capable of making citizens live in perpetual fear.

“The threat to destroy Nigeria was not an idle talk. It was aimed at creating Biafra ,and there are consequences for such statements”, Awomolo argued.

To this end, the prosecution   contending, urged the court to dismiss Kanu’s  no-case-submission.