posted 29th May 2025
Nnamdi Kanu Secures Legal Victory as Court Rules Key Exhibits Inadmissible
Abuja, Nigeria – 29 May 2025
In a significant development in the ongoing trial of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled in Kanu’s favour in a trial-within-trial. The court declared certain exhibits inadmissible, citing the absence of Kanu’s legal counsel during the taking of his statement in 2015. This ruling marks another pivotal moment in a case that has drawn widespread attention both domestically and internationally.
According to a statement posted on X by Aloy Ejimakor, Kanu’s lead counsel, the court expunged the exhibits on the grounds that they were obtained without Kanu’s legal representation present. Ejimakor noted that a similar exhibit, previously admitted in evidence, was also struck out for the same reason. “In plain terms, the exhibits were ruled inadmissible,” Ejimakor stated, highlighting the legal team’s success in challenging the prosecution’s evidence.
The trial-within-trial, a procedure used to determine the admissibility of evidence, centred on statements allegedly obtained from Kanu in 2015. Kanu’s legal team argued that the absence of counsel during this process violated his rights, rendering the evidence legally untenable. The court’s decision to rule the exhibits inadmissible strengthens Kanu’s defence as the case progresses.
Nnamdi Kanu, a prominent advocate for the secession of Biafra from Nigeria, has been in the custody of the State Security Service (SSS) since his abduction from Kenya in June 2021. He faces charges related to terrorism, incitement, and other allegations, stemming from his leadership of IPOB, a group banned by the Nigerian government. Kanu was first arrested in 2015 but fled the country in 2017 after being granted bail. His subsequent kidnap in Kenya and transfer to Nigeria sparked controversy, with Kanu’s legal team alleging that the process violated international law.
The trial has been fraught with procedural challenges and legal disputes. In September 2024, Justice Binta Nyako, who had been presiding over the case, recused herself following Kanu’s accusations of bias. The case was reassigned to Justice Omotosho by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, prompting further objections from Kanu’s legal team, who argued that the reassignment and ongoing trial lacked legal merit.
In May 2025, Kanu’s legal team raised fresh objections, citing jurisdictional and procedural infractions. They invoked Section 76(1)(d)(iii) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, which requires that terrorism-related offences be evaluated in the country from which an individual was extradited. The team also challenged the choice of Abuja as the trial venue, arguing that the alleged offences occurred outside Nigeria, notably in the United Kingdom and Kenya.
The ruling on the inadmissibility of the exhibits is a notable victory for Kanu’s defence, potentially weakening the prosecution’s case. Legal analysts suggest that the decision could set a precedent for ensuring due process in high-profile cases, particularly regarding the rights of defendants during interrogations.
Kanu’s trial has polarised public opinion in Nigeria. Supporters of IPOB view him as a symbol of resistance against perceived marginalisation of the Igbo community in south-eastern Nigeria, while critics, including the Nigerian government, accuse him of inciting violence and threatening national security. The case has also drawn scrutiny from international human rights organisations, with Amnesty International previously calling for media access to the courtroom to ensure transparency.
Ohanaeze Ndigbo, a socio-cultural organisation representing Igbo communities, has consistently advocated for a fair trial for Kanu. In 2021, the group expressed support for his legal proceedings, provided they adhered to Nigerian and international legal standards.
The court is expected to continue hearings in Kanu’s case, with further examination of evidence and witnesses scheduled. Ejimakor’s recent posts on X indicate that the legal team remains prepared for upcoming sessions, with cross-examinations planned to challenge the prosecution’s evidence.
The Nigerian government has maintained its stance on prosecuting Kanu, with the charges against him including allegations of issuing threats and inciting violence through broadcasts received in Nigeria. The prosecution has previously presented evidence, such as Kanu’s radio broadcasts from 2015, which will now face increased scrutiny following the court’s ruling on the inadmissible exhibits.
As the trial progresses, Kanu’s case continues to highlight tensions surrounding issues of free speech, right to self-determination, and judicial independence in Nigeria. The outcome of the trial could have far-reaching implications for the country’s political landscape and its handling of agitations.
