A lawyer, Onyedikachi Ifedi, has claimed that the Federal Government has abandoned its response to the appeal filed by the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, challenging his conviction.

Ifedi, a member of the Mazi Nnamdi Global Legal Consortium, made the claim in a statement on Tuesday, saying the deadline for the government to file its response to the appeal had expired.

Kanu’s family and members of his legal team had earlier accused the government of avoiding the court after reports that the appeal had not been listed for hearing. IPOB has also threatened to boycott the 2027 election in the South-East if the appeal is not heard.

Giving an update, Ifedi said the Federal Government had failed to file a response within the required period.

He said, “Nigeria has abandoned the appeal. The Federal Government filed nothing. Time expired. No brief. No substantive defence to the appeal.”

The lawyer argued that the central issue before the Court of Appeal should be whether the Federal High Court had the legal jurisdiction to try Kanu in the first place.

Ifedi also alleged that Justice James Omotosho, who presided over Kanu’s trial, made more than 150 serious errors during the proceedings.

He specifically challenged the legal basis of the charge against Kanu, arguing that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction because the terrorism law cited in the charge had already been repealed.

According to him, Kanu’s trial resumed on March 21, 2025, under the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013, despite the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022 having come into force on May 12, 2022 and repealed the earlier legislation.

Ifedi argued that this meant the law cited in the charge was no longer valid when the trial resumed.

He said the issue was fundamental because a court must first have lawful jurisdiction before taking a plea, receiving evidence or conducting a criminal trial.

“The court could not become lawfully seized simply because it began acting as though it was,” he said.

The lawyer maintained that subsequent proceedings, including Kanu’s plea, the presentation of evidence, the trial and his eventual conviction and life sentence, could not correct what he described as an initial lack of jurisdiction.

He argued that even a properly conducted trial could not cure a jurisdictional defect.

“A thousand witnesses cannot cure it. A mountain of documents cannot cure it. Months of proceedings cannot cure it,” he said.

Ifedi added that the first issue the Court of Appeal should determine is whether the Federal High Court had a valid legal foundation to hear the case when Kanu’s trial resumed.

He maintained that because the law cited in the charge had been repealed, the court was not properly seized of the case and the proceedings that followed should therefore be reconsidered.

Nnamdi Kanu: Lawyer Claims FG Abandoned Appeal Against Conviction

Comments (0)