The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has reacted to the recent judgment against its detained leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, calling on the Federal High Court in Abuja to specify the legal provisions underpinning Justice James Omotosho’s ruling.
In a statement signed by its spokesperson, Comrade Emma Powerful, IPOB argued that the verdict raises several constitutional questions that cannot be ignored.
The group said it plans to review the judgment in detail and publicly highlight what it considers major legal inconsistencies, presenting its findings to both Nigerians and the international community.
According to IPOB, the court did not tender any weapons or items allegedly linked to violence, and no witness testified that Kanu committed an offence under Nigerian or international law—points IPOB says were evident during the courtroom proceedings.
The group reiterated its long-standing position that self-determination is a legitimate and globally recognised right, noting that calls for a referendum should not be equated with criminal activity.
IPOB cited Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, which states that no person can be convicted for an offence not defined in written law.
Challenging Justice Omotosho, IPOB demanded the court identify the specific written law relied upon in the ruling and confirm whether it remains valid.
The organisation stressed that it will examine the judgment line by line, raising what it describes as serious constitutional and procedural concerns.
IPOB further stated that the case extends beyond the organisation itself, touching on human rights, judicial transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria.
The group also reaffirmed its commitment to peaceful advocacy, promising to continue diplomatic engagement with international bodies while pursuing its campaign through lawful channels
