Court Dismisses Nnamdi Kanu’s No‑Case Submission, Orders Him to Enter Defence

 


Abuja, Nigeria — September 26, 2025

A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the “no-case” submission filed by Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), and directed him to enter his defence in the ongoing terrorism trial.

The court, presided over by Justice James Omotosho, ruled that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case against Kanu, allowing the trial to proceed. While this does not amount to a verdict of guilt, it signals that Kanu must now respond to the charges against him.

Kanu’s legal team had argued that the evidence presented by the government was insufficient to sustain the case and sought its dismissal. They also contended that his extradition from Kenya in June 2021 was unlawful. However, the court rejected these arguments, noting the absence of supporting sworn evidence regarding the extradition.

The prosecution, which has closed its case with five witnesses, had accused Kanu of terrorism-related offenses linked to his campaign for secession of Nigeria’s South-East region and parts of neighbouring states under the banner of “Biafra.”

Justice Omotosho emphasized that Kanu is presumed innocent and retains the right to defend himself. The court further directed the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA) to form a panel to assess his health, following Kanu’s request for medical treatment at the National Hospital, which was denied.

The trial has been adjourned to October 8, 2025, when Kanu will begin presenting his defence. The medical panel is expected to submit a report on his fitness to continue with the trial before proceedings resume.

The case has attracted national and international attention due to Kanu’s high-profile leadership of IPOB and the ongoing tensions surrounding separatist movements in Nigeria’s South-East. Legal analysts say the court’s ruling is a significant step that moves the trial closer to resolution, while also highlighting the challenges of balancing national security concerns with the rights of defendants in high-stakes political cases.

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post