Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, UPON, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was on Thursday, sentenced to life imprisonment following conviction on all seven counts of terrorism preferred against him by the Federal Government.
The judgement is the culmination of years of a lengthy trial that saw different judges handling the trial.
Kanu, who has been in custody since his controversial re-arrest in Kenya in 2021, shouted angrily in objection to the proceedings and was ejected from court ahead of today’s ruling. He had argued that his unlawful extradition from Kenya undermined any chance of a fair trial.
Kanu pleaded not guilty in 2021 to seven charges that included “terrorism”, treason and perpetuating falsehoods against Nigeria’s former President Muhammadu Buhari.
Justice James Omotosho who delivered the judgment held that Kanu was guilty on each of the counts, which covered allegations of engaging in acts of terrorism, membership and leadership of a proscribed organisation, issuing threats, involvement in attacks that led to the killing of security operatives, destruction and burning of properties, concealment of information, and the importation of an unregistered radio transmitter.
Justice Omotosho also ordered that all exhibits taken from Kanu including the Radio Biafra transmitter be forfeited to the Federal Government.
“His intention was quite clear, as he believed in violence. These threats of violence were nothing but terrorist acts,” Omotosho said.
The judge said the IPOB leader was “a person who cannot be allowed to remain in the company of sane minds”, while describing him as an “international terrorist”.
He said Kanu’s claim of being a freedom fighter could not excuse actions taken outside the bounds of the law.
Omotosho noted that Kanu pursued his agitation through “brutal force and terrorism”, which caused the “bloodshed of innocent citizens”.
THE DEATH PENALTY REQUEST
The federal government, through Adegboyega Awomolo, a senior advocate of Nigeria and senior counsel in the matter, had earlier asked for the death penalty.
The punishment prescribed for the offences in Counts One, Two, Four, Five and Six, pursuant to Section 12H of the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013, is death,” he said.
“With all sense of humility, I say as a prosecutor that this court has no discretion in that regard.
“The only sentence Your Lordship can impose for Counts One, Two, Four, Five and Six is death, because the law empowers you to do so, and we expect that you will.”
However, the judge said that while the IPOB founder’s crimes merited the death penalty, he opted for a life sentence to show mercy.
‘HE REMAINED ARROGANT, COCKY, FULL OF HIMSELF’
“He has been convicted, and this court is only being merciful to him because we have to be merciful as enjoined by our Lord Christ Jesus Christ. The court is minded to sentence the convict to death due to the atrocity he committed. The convict has not shown any remorse whatsoever for his actions.” Omotosho said.
“He remained arrogant, cocky, and full of himself without realising the magnitude of his crime and the effect of what he has done against his people in the south-east. I have listened to the allocates made by a member or part of a representative representing the constituency of the convict. Although I am not really persuaded, I must show mercy.
“The court is moved by chapter 23, verse 23 in the book of Matthew. It is on that note that the court will follow the above admonition of Jesus Christ and show mercy to the convict.
“In addition, the death penalty globally is now being condemned by the international community. Consequently, and in the interest of justice, I hereby sentence the convicts to life imprisonment for Counts 1, 4, 5, and 6, instead of a death sentence.
“With respect to Count 3, he is hereby sentenced to 20 years imprisonment without the option of a fine. For Count 7, he is sentenced to 5 years imprisonment with no option of a fine.
To extend the mercy, I hereby order that the sentence shall run concurrently.”
TERMS OF SENTENCING
The judge said, by virtue of his behaviour in court, Kanu is not suitable for Kuje prison.
He said that, having exhibited a violent attitude throughout the trial, he must be placed in protective custody in any part of Nigeria.
“I have no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the convict has the tendency of violence. The tendency of violence has not left him,” Omotosho said.
“It is based on this that he must be kept in a facility that is suitable for his person, as putting him in a Kuje Correctional Centre may not be appropriate.”
Omotosho said Kanu must not be allowed to use any electronic devices, including phones, and must be under the supervision of the Office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) if he must use any device.
