“List The Appeal, Answer The Five Questions Or Release Him” — Kanu’s Family Asks Court Of Appeal To Review Conviction, Seeks NJC Probe Of Trial Judge
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
The family of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has called on the Court of Appeal to list his appeal against his conviction for hearing and determine the constitutional and statutory objections he has raised. It has also asked the National Judicial Council (NJC) to examine the conduct of the trial judge, Justice James Omotosho.
In a statement signed by Prince Emmanuel Kanu on behalf of the Okwu-Kanu family of Umuahia, Abia State, the family argued that the offences and penalties on which the conviction rested must be identified in a written law that was in force when judgment was delivered on November 20, 2025. It also alleged that Kanu was denied a fair hearing during the trial. Those are the family’s claims, which remain matters for the appellate court to determine.
“List the appeal. Determine the written-law question. Determine the jurisdictional questions. Apply the Constitution. Apply the statutes enacted by the National Assembly. And where the conviction cannot survive those requirements, quash it,” the family said.
The demand follows complaints by Kanu’s lawyers that his appeal has yet to be listed for hearing and that the prosecution has not filed a response. IPOB has threatened a boycott of the 2027 election in the South-East over the delay. The family’s statement did not establish why the appeal has not been listed, and there has been no determination by the Court of Appeal on the objections it raised.
The family asked the NJC to examine whether Justice Omotosho properly dealt with its argument that the earlier terrorism legislation had been repealed before Kanu’s conviction.
“We call upon the National Judicial Council (NJC) to examine, on the record, the conduct of a judge who stated the governing constitutional rule, invoked the authority that says a repealed law has no legal life, confronted the repeal and transition provisions, and nevertheless proceeded to convict under the repealed legal regime,” the statement said.
“Omotosho — show us the law,” the family demanded.
Setting out what it described as five questions for the Court of Appeal, the family said:
“The five questions. Answer them, or release him. ONE. Under section 36(12), what written law — not a repealed Act and not a savings clause standing alone — defined each offence and prescribed its penalty on 20 November 2025? Name the Act. Name the section. Show that it was in force.
“TWO. Under sections 97 and 98(2) of the TPPA 2022, where is the statutory transition? Show the corresponding provisions. Show the operative charge. Show the plea. Show the convicting provisions. Show the transit.
“THREE. Under section 122 of the Evidence Act, when did the court take judicial notice of the repeal of the 2013 terrorism legislation and CEMA, and what legal consequence did the court give that repeal?
“FOUR. Under section 36(1), was Kanu afforded the constitutionally guaranteed fair-hearing process, including his final address, before judgment and the required sentencing procedure before sentence?
“FIVE. Under section 36(9), what was the constitutional effect of the 13 October 2022 discharge and quashing of the counts, and where is the legal authority for the subsequent proceeding?”
The family further alleged that Kanu was not given the opportunity to make a final address before judgment or afforded the required procedure before sentencing. It said those alleged omissions affected the fairness of the proceedings that resulted in his life sentence.
“He denied the fair hearing guaranteed by Section 36(1).
“Section 36(1) guarantees a fair hearing in the determination of criminal liability. That guarantee governs the process by which the state seeks to take away a person’s liberty.
“Kanu was entitled to the constitutionally guaranteed opportunity to make his final address before judgment. He was also entitled to the procedural protections governing sentencing, including allocutus. The record shows what happened. The final address was not given as the Constitution required. The allocutus was not given as the law required. That is not a cosmetic defect. It is not courtroom etiquette. It is not a minor procedural blemish. It goes to the fairness of the criminal adjudication itself. You cannot separate a life sentence from the process that produced it.”
Justice Omotosho had rejected Kanu’s objection to the legal basis of the charges during the trial. The Federal High Court subsequently convicted him, and his appeal now gives the Court of Appeal the opportunity to review the judgment and the procedure leading to it. The family wants the conviction quashed if the appellate court finds that the legal requirements were not met.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
