A coalition of self determination activists on Friday asked Nigerians and the international community to examine the transcripts of court proceedings in the trial of leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu.
Kanu was on November 20, 2025 convicted on terrorism charges filed against him by the Nigerian government and as a result, sentenced to life imprisonment. He has since been moved to the Sokoto custodial centre of the Nigeria Correctional Service, where he is serving the sentence.
Kanu’s legal team is expected to file an appeal against the judgment of the Abuja Federal High Court but in a statement on Friday, the activists, including American Veterans of Igbo Descent, AVID, Ambassadors For Self-Determination and Rising Sun Foundation, alleged that ‘grave’ procedural breaches occurred in the course of the trial.
According to them, an examination of transcripts of the proceedings of the trial would show that the breaches undermined fair hearing and the integrity of the judicial system.
The statement was jointly signed by Dr Sylvester Onyia for AVID, Benson Nwankwo for Ambassadors For Self-Determination, and Mazi Maxwell Dede for Rising Sun Foundation.
“We, American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID), Ambassadors For Self-Determination and Rising Sun Foundation issue this statement to alert the international community, Nigerian public, the legal fraternity, and all institutions committed to democratic governance that two grave procedural breaches occurred in the recent judgment delivered by Justice Omotosho in the case involving Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.
“These breaches undermine the very pillars of fair hearing, constitutional order, and the integrity of the Nigerian justice system. We urge Nigerians, legal experts, civil society organisations, and members of the press to take the time to carefully review the publicly available Certified True Copies (CTCs) of the court transcripts and proceedings. These documents speak for themselves,” the statement said.
The activists noted that anyone who reads the record will see how, “step by step”, the handling of the case departed from established legal procedure, sidelined constitutional safeguards, and ultimately undermined justice and the rule of law.
Stressing that transparency demands that the public examine the record firsthand, the activists went ahead to identify the alleged procedural breaches that they said undermined the trial.
They specifically noted that the court relied on a struck-out charge to secure the conviction.
“During the early stages of the case, the court struck out eight (8) counts, including Count 14, which alleged that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu incited the destruction of public property during the EndSARS protests,” the statement explained. But, the statement added, in the final judgment, the judge “explicitly referenced that destruction of public property (Lagos Airport) took place during the EndSARS protests, as a reason for convicting Mazi Kanu”.
The court’s action, the activists claimed, is a fundamental legal error because a defendant cannot be convicted on an allegation not properly before the court.
“The Constitution guarantees a defendant’s right to know the precise charges he must defend. Importing facts from a struck-out count violates the principles of criminal justice and constitutes a miscarriage of justice.
A conviction built on an allegation that legally no longer exists is inherently unsafe,” the statement argued.
The second procedural error, according to the statement, is “denial of the right to file a final written address”.
The statement alleged that the judge denied the defence the opportunity to file a final written address — a right the Supreme Court consistently affirms as “a vital component of fair hearing”.
According to the activists, although the court repeatedly instructed the defence to raise its objections in the final written address, “however, when the time came to file that address, the court foreclosed the defence and immediately proceeded to deliver judgment”.
The statement said the court’s alleged action violated Section 36 of the Constitution, which guaranteed the right to be heard, creating an appearance of predetermined outcome, thereby undermining the public’s trust in judicial neutrality.
The activists demanded urgent ‘corrective action’ concerning the breaches.
“For the sake of justice, constitutional order, and Nigeria’s democratic credibility, these issues must not be ignored. They demand scrutiny, accountability, and urgent corrective action,” the statement stressed.