Court sentences Nnamdi Kanu to life imprisonment for terrorism
The Federal High Court in Abuja has sentenced Nnamdi Kanu, a Biafra activist, to life imprisonment for terrorism-related offenses.
Judge James Omotosho stated that Mr. Kanu deserved a death sentence due to the serious nature of his crimes and his lack of remorse, but opted for a more merciful punishment based on scripture.
The judge referenced the Bible's book of Matthew when deciding to reduce Mr. Kanu's sentence to life imprisonment instead of the death penalty. He ultimately sentenced Mr. Kanu to life imprisonment for counts 1, 4, 5, and 6, “instead of capital punishment.”
Additionally, he imposed a 20-year prison term for count 3 and five years for count 7.
He mandated that these sentences be served concurrently.
The judge also ruled that Mr. Kanu should not have access to digital devices and must be held in protective custody.
He ordered the confiscation of the radio transmitters that the prosecution claimed Mr. Kanu smuggled into Nigeria in 2015 for the federal government.
Mr. Kanu's conviction aligns with Simon Ekpa's conviction by a Finnish court on September 1, although Mr. Ekpa received a lighter sentence of six years in prison.
Both individuals were found guilty of utilizing terrorism as a means to advocate for the independence of Nigeria's predominantly Igbo Southeast and nearby areas as an independent Biafra.
Over the years, they incited violence through various online broadcasts, issued threats against security personnel and their families, and encouraged the destruction of police stations, government facilities, and foreign embassies.
Regarding Mr. Kanu's behavior during the trial, which began in 2015, Judge Omotosho remarked on Mr. Kanu's disruptive actions, including his insistence on the court's inability to proceed with the judgment on Thursday. The judge had to instruct State Security Service (SSS) officials to remove him from the courtroom for the remaining hours of the proceedings.
He noted that his review of the case since 2015 showed that “undoubtedly, the convict has behaved poorly throughout this time, causing delays while claiming to be unlawfully detained.”
The judge characterized Mr. Kanu as arrogant, aggressive, self-important, unrepentant, and oblivious to the repercussions of his actions.
Throughout his lengthy five-hour judgment, the judge emphasized that the prosecution's evidence went unchallenged due to the lack of a defense presented in the case.
Despite the convict's behavior, the judge stated that the court would not take this into account during sentencing.
“This court is merely showing him mercy. It has been suggested that he could be sentenced to death,” the judge noted.
“I must balance justice with mercy.” The judge referenced chapter 22, verse 23 of the book of Matthew for his decision.
“In this regard, I will adhere to the teachings of Jesus Christ,” adding that “the death penalty is generally condemned worldwide.”
He stated, “I hereby impose a life imprisonment sentence for Counts 1, 4, 5, and 6 rather than the death penalty. Life is sacred to God.”
“For count 3, he is sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment.”
“For count 7, the sentence is five years’ imprisonment with no possibility of fine.”
He concluded that the sentences would be served concurrently.
He mentioned that the convict “exhibits a propensity for violence; this is why he must be housed in a facility appropriate for his confinement.”
He also remarked that Mr. Kanu should not have access to any digital devices. If necessary, such access should only be granted under the supervision and guidance of the National Security Adviser.
Considering the number of lives lost due to his actions, the judge stated, the convict “merits protective custody. I hereby order that the convict be held in protective custody at any custodial facility within the country.”
“The transmitter shall be forfeited to the Federal Government,” Mr. Omotosho concluded.
Charges
The judge previously found Mr. Kanu guilty on six counts of terrorism out of the seven charges presented by the prosecution. Among the terrorism charges leading to his conviction were acts of terrorism, inciting violence against security personnel and their families, foreign embassies and officials, the Lagos State government, and individuals who disregarded the sit-at-home directive in the South-east region. The court imposed a life sentence for these offenses.
Mr. Kanu was additionally convicted of illegally importing a Tram 50L radio transmitter that was hidden in a container marked as containing used household items into Nigeria in 2015. The prosecution claimed that he stored the transmitter in Ubulisluzor in Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra State. The judge imposed a five-year prison sentence for this crime.
He was also found guilty of being a member of the banned Independent People of Biafra (IPOB), which was designated as a terrorist organization by a court order in September 2017. He received a 20-year prison term for this offense.
In its ruling, the Päijät-Häme District Court in Finland sentenced Mr. Ekpa to six years in prison.
Prior to sentencing Mr. Kanu on Thursday, the judge heard from the prosecution lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, as well as Obi Aguocha, a member of the House of Representatives representing Mr. Kanu’s constituency – the Umuahia North/Umuahia South/Ikwuano Federal Constituency.
While Mr. Aguocha urged the judge to consider a lenient sentence, Mr. Awomolo advocated for the death penalty on five of the seven counts.
Mr. Aguocha stated, “The matter has reached a conclusion. For now, I am not his attorney. I am unaware if there was a safety appeal, but for the moment, the Lord is my brother.”
"He's my companion. We were classmates from primary through secondary school, although he was younger than me. However, as a member of the National Assembly, it is my duty to represent him as well as the Lord."
The prosecutor argued that the judge had no leeway in sentencing due to the specific wording of the law concerning the terrorism charges against Mr. Kanu. He further stated that it was the court's obligation to impose the death penalty on him for counts 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 related to terrorism.
The senior advocate remarked, "There is nothing left to consider except the lawful enactment of sentences. The penalties mandated for the offenses in counts 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 are death sentences."
"According to Section 12(h) of the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013. My Lord, I assert, as the prosecutor, that this court has no discretion in this matter."
"The only penalty that your Lordship can impose for counts 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 is capital punishment. This court is empowered to do so and, with all due respect, must do so."
The prosecutor also requested that the convict be deprived of electronic devices and be held in the most secure custody.
The charges originated from his aggressive campaign for the independence of the Igbo-dominated southeastern region of Nigeria known as Biafra.
Mr. Kanu, a dual citizen of Nigeria and Britain, has consistently denied any wrongdoing but did not present a defense when prompted by the court.
Background
This case has been in the judicial system since 2015, having gone through four trial judges over its decade-long progression.
Mr. Omotosho, who began overseeing the trial in March of this year, is the fourth judge to manage the case. The previous three judges recused themselves after Mr. Kanu accused them of bias.
He was held in the custody of the SSS from 2015 to 2017 when the trial judge Binta Nyako granted him bail.
However, he fled the country following a military raid on his residence in Afara-Ukwu, near Umuahia, Abia State, in September 2017.
He was arrested by the Nigerian authorities in Kenya in June 2021 and returned to Nigeria to continue his trial. His departure from the country delayed the trial proceedings for approximately four years.
Initially charged with treasonable felony in 2015, the case transitioned into a terrorism indictment following amendments to include Mr. Kanu's inciting broadcasts, particularly during the 2020 #EndSARS protests and at multiple times between 2018 and 2021 when he was outside Nigeria.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja dismissed the charges in October 2022, citing the illegality of his capture in Kenya and the extraordinary rendition to Nigeria in June 2021. The court determined that the government's unlawful actions invalidated the charges.
However, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeal's decision in December 2023.
While the Supreme Court acknowledged that Mr. Kanu's abduction and extraordinary rendition to Nigeria were unlawful, unjust, and oppressive, it ruled that these actions did not undermine the legitimacy of the charges or deprive the Federal High Court of its jurisdiction to trial him.
After the prosecution concluded its case in June of this year with five witnesses, Mr. Kanu submitted a no-case submission, asserting that the prosecution had not provided credible evidence against him. However, Mr. Omotosho rejected the no-case submission in September, stating that Mr. Kanu had a case to answer and should proceed with his defense.
Since that time, multiple proceedings have been arranged for Mr. Kanu to begin his defense. Amidst this, he unexpectedly terminated his lawyers and informed the court of his intention to represent himself.
The case was postponed several times to allow for the possibility of a defense, while Mr. Kanu consistently argued that there was no legitimate charge against him to defend. He contended that the accusations made against him “were based on a repealed terrorism law.”
He submitted a notice of preliminary objection addressing issues such as being charged under a law that had been repealed and the illegality of his extraordinary rendition from Kenya, urging the court to dismiss the charges against him and release him.
The court, in its ruling on Thursday, rejected all the concerns Mr. Kanu raised in his preliminary objection.
Leave A Comment