Federal Court Controversy Deepens As APC Chieftain Condemns Ruling And Foresees Imminent Freedom For Nnamdi Kanu

 

A wave of heated reactions has followed the recent judgement delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja, where Indigenous People of Biafra leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, was sentenced to life imprisonment. One of the strongest rebukes has come from Chief Eze Chukwuemeka Eze, a prominent figure within the All Progressives Congress and former spokesperson of the now defunct New Peoples Democratic Party. His comments have added significant weight to the already intense conversations surrounding the integrity and legality of the trial.

Chief Eze argued that the court’s decision was fundamentally flawed because it proceeded despite an active appeal on jurisdiction. According to him, the unresolved questions surrounding Kanu’s forceful return to Nigeria should have compelled the judge to halt proceedings until higher courts addressed those concerns. He stressed that the extraordinary circumstances of the rendition raised critical legal issues that could not be brushed aside without consequence.

Courtroom observers described tense scenes on the day the verdict was delivered. Drama unfolded when Justice Omotosho refused to acknowledge Kanu’s final written address, a document believed by supporters to contain arguments capable of altering the course of the case. Matters escalated further when the IPOB leader was denied the opportunity to present his final comments before sentencing. He was subsequently escorted out of the courtroom; the verdict was read in his absence, a moment that has drawn sharp criticism from legal minds and civil rights advocates.

Chief Eze emphasized section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees every Nigerian the right to fair hearing. He insisted that this constitutional safeguard was disregarded throughout the final phase of the trial. To him, the judgement amounted to what he described as a corruption of legal practice and a miscarriage of justice that should not be allowed to stand.

Public reactions widened when Eze compared Kanu’s fate with that of Boko Haram co founder Mamman Nur, who reportedly received a five year sentence despite links to thousands of civilian deaths. The contrasting outcomes, he argued, reveal troubling inconsistencies in how justice is administered and fuel doubts about the country’s anti terrorism judicial processes.

Raising broader concerns about national security, he criticized the government for failing to contain the repeated attacks by extremist groups. He lamented that many Nigerians continue to face danger while those responsible often evade proportionate punishment.

Chief Eze urged supporters to remain calm. With confidence, he declared that Kanu’s conviction would not withstand scrutiny at appellate levels. He expressed certainty that both Nigerian law and international human rights principles would ultimately prevail, paving the way for Kanu’s release.