The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has approached the Court of Appeal in Abuja to stop further proceedings in his ongoing trial before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court.
Kanu, who is facing a seven-count charge of alleged terrorism, filed a motion on notice dated November 10 and filed on November 12, personally signing the document.
He is seeking an order staying proceedings in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, Federal Republic of Nigeria vs. Nnamdi Kanu pending the determination of his appeal.
READ ALSO: Nnamdi Kanu Files Motion to Set Aside Court Judgment Remitting Trial to Federal High Court
According to court filings, the motion came after Justice Omotosho fixed November 20 for judgment, following Kanu’s refusal to open his defence.
The IPOB leader had maintained that he would not be tried under what he described as “repealed laws.”
In a nine-ground appeal, Kanu argued that the trial court failed to rule on key jurisdictional issues he raised and did not determine the validity of the charges before moving toward judgment.
READ ALSO: Kanu’s Terrorism Trial: Court Fixes November 20 for Judgment
He further alleged that despite submitting a list of defence witnesses, the court denied him the opportunity to call them, insisting that his objections would be addressed only during judgment.
Justice Omotosho Fixes Nov. 20 for Judgement
“The trial court has adjourned the matter for judgment on November 20, 2025. If this application is not granted, the appellant may be unlawfully convicted without being afforded the opportunity to challenge the validity of the counts or the court’s jurisdiction,” Kanu stated in his motion.
He added that granting the stay of proceedings would not prejudice the prosecution, noting that the case has been ongoing since 2015 and was only reassigned to Justice Omotosho earlier this year.
Kanu, who now represents himself after dismissing his legal team, continues to contest the legality of the charges, claiming they were filed under repealed laws, specifically, the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 and the Customs and Excise Management Act, Cap C45 LFN 2004.
He also alleged a conspiracy involving British authorities to influence his conviction, a claim Justice Omotosho dismissed, clarifying that he had no connection with any external influence and was not the judge who handled Kanu’s previous cases.
Earlier, Justice Omotosho ruled that Kanu had exhausted the six days allocated to him to present his defence and, by refusing to do so, had waived his right to a fair hearing under Section 36 of the Constitution.
“The court has given the defendant ample opportunity under Section 36 of the Constitution. He has waived his right,” the judge stated before adjourning the matter to November 20 for judgment.
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.
