Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a motion at the Supreme Court seeking to set aside its December 15, 2023, judgment that remitted his terrorism trial back to the Federal High Court, Abuja.
The apex court had, in its ruling in suit number SC/CR/1361/2022, ordered Kanu’s continued prosecution at the Federal High Court after the Court of Appeal discharged and acquitted him in a judgment delivered on October 13, 2022.
However, in the new motion filed on November 6, 2025, Kanu is asking the Supreme Court to nullify the December 2023 decision, arguing that the ruling was delivered without jurisdiction and based on laws that no longer exist.
The motion, brought pursuant to Section 6(6)(A) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), is between Kanu, who appeared as respondent/applicant in person, and the Federal Government of Nigeria as appellant/respondent.
READ ALSO: Kanu’s Terrorism Trial: Court Fixes November 20 for Judgment
Among the reliefs sought, Kanu is asking the court to extend the time within which he may seek leave to file for a review of the judgment and to grant him permission to do so.
In the application, Kanu explained that his prolonged detention by the Department of State Services (DSS) and previous legal representation prevented him from properly reviewing the judgment earlier.
He said he only obtained the complete record of his case on October 26, 2025.
“Upon a careful examination of the record, the applicant discovered, with profound juridical concern, that the judgment of this Honourable Court of 15 December 2023 was delivered per incuriam, having been predicated on statutes which, at the material time, had ceased to exist in law,” Kanu stated.
READ ALSO: Terrorism Charge: IPOB Leader Kanu Finally Obeys Court Order, Files Defence
He further argued that the ruling ignored the extant provisions of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022 and violated Section 36(12) of the Constitution and Section 122 of the Evidence Act 2011.
According to him, the issue now raised touches on the very root of jurisdiction, which cannot be defeated by time or technicalities.
In an affidavit supporting the motion, Kanu’s younger brother, Prince Emmanuel Kanu, stated that since the Supreme Court delivered its 2023 judgment, the IPOB leader has remained in DSS custody under conditions that limited his access to lawyers and case materials.
He disclosed that Kanu decided in October 2025 to personally take over the management of his case to ensure a comprehensive review and pursue appropriate legal redress.
Prince Emmanuel warned that denying the motion for additional time to file the application would “perpetuate a palpable miscarriage of justice and an enduring stain upon judicial regularity.”
Kanu To Face Judgement at FHC
Meanwhile, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has fixed November 20, 2025, to deliver judgment in the terrorism case against Kanu.
Pinnacle Daily recalls that after the court scheduled the date for judgment, Kanu declared that he could not be convicted under a repealed law, insisting that the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013, under which he was charged, had been replaced by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022.
The IPOB leadership has also denied reports suggesting that Kanu forfeited his right to a defence in the ongoing trial.
In a statement signed by its spokesperson, Emma Powerful, IPOB described such claims as “false and misleading,” maintaining that Kanu has continued to insist on a fair and lawful trial.
“Let the truth be clear: Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has not forfeited anything. What is happening in court has raised serious legal questions that must be addressed within the limits of the law,” the statement read.
The group reaffirmed its support for Kanu and urged members and the general public to remain calm as the matter proceeds through the judicial process.
Rafiyat Sadiq is a political, justice, and human rights reporter with Pinnacle Daily, known for fearless reporting and impactful storytelling. At Pinnacle Daily, she brings clarity and depth to issues shaping governance, democracy, and the protection of citizens’ rights.
