Detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh motion before the Federal High Court in Abuja challenging the court’s jurisdiction to continue his trial for alleged terrorism offences and seeking to void all proceedings conducted so far.
The document, titled “Notice of Preliminary Objection to Jurisdiction,” was filed on October 16 and personally signed by Kanu, while the supporting affidavit was deposed to by Prince Emmanuel Kanu, who identified himself as the defendant’s sibling. The motion came a day before the date fixed by the court for Kanu to open his defence.
The prosecution raised questions over the authenticity of the motion and whether it originated from Kanu’s legal team, led by former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Kanu Agabi (SAN). In a letter dated October 16, the lead prosecuting counsel, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), wrote to Agabi asking him to confirm if the process indeed emanated from the defence team. The letter read: “Our law office received, today, the 16th day of October, 2025, a process titled: ‘Notice of Preliminary Objection to Jurisdiction,’ dated and filed October 16, 2025. Grateful, confirm whether this process emanated from the legal team led by you, representing the defendant in this criminal trial.”
At the last hearing on October 16, Justice James Omotosho had granted accelerated hearing and scheduled six consecutive days, beginning October 23, for the defence to open and close its case. On the same day, Justice Omotosho announced that a medical report from the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA) had declared Kanu fit to continue his trial. When asked if he had seen the report, Agabi confirmed receiving and sharing it with his team, adding that the defence had no objection.
Before adjourning, Justice Omotosho granted an oral application by Agabi requesting that Kanu’s legal team be allowed a private consultation with him outside the Department of State Services (DSS) premises before the commencement of his defence. Agabi expressed concerns that the DSS might secretly record their discussions. The judge approved that the private meeting be held in the courtroom on Wednesday.
In his new notice of objection, Kanu is seeking several declarations and orders from the court. He asked for a declaration that his continued prosecution under the repealed Terrorism (Prevention) Amendment Act 2013, and upon a proscription order obtained ex parte and without fair hearing, violates sections 1(3), 36(1)-(12), and 42 of the Constitution, as well as Articles 7 and 26 of the African Charter, and is therefore null and void.
He also prayed the court to declare that the Federal High Court’s ex parte order proscribing IPOB, obtained without notice or hearing, while Justice Binta Nyako’s ruling that IPOB is not a lawful society remained in force, is unconstitutional, unlawful, and cannot ground criminal liability.
Kanu further sought an order striking out or permanently staying counts one to eight (except count 15) of the amended charge dated January 14, 2022, for being barred by double jeopardy, having the same factual ingredients as counts six to fourteen earlier struck out by the Federal High Court on April 8, 2022.
He requested an order declaring that his extraordinary rendition from Kenya without extradition proceedings or due process violated Section 36(1) and (9) of the Constitution, the Extradition Act (Cap E25 LFN 2004), and Articles 12 and 13 of the African Charter, thereby robbing the court of jurisdiction.
Kanu also sought an order nullifying all proceedings conducted in breach of his right to adequate defence facilities, confidential communication with counsel, and fair hearing, citing alleged eavesdropping, seizure of legal materials, and denial of unmonitored access.
He based his objection on five grounds, the first being that his continued prosecution, despite the binding Court of Appeal discharge of October 13, 2022, and subsequent eight-day post-judgment detention, constitutes what he described as flagrant contempt of court.
