Abuja, Oct. 23, 2025
The latest Nnamdi Kanu court ruling has stirred renewed legal debate as the Federal High Court in Abuja overruled the IPOB leader’s objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction in his ongoing terrorism trial. Justice James Omotosho directed Nnamdi Kanu to enter his defence, affirming that the constitutional process must now continue.
Justice Omotosho stated that all issues raised by Kanu to challenge the Nnamdi Kanu court ruling had already been settled in previous judgments. He emphasized that Section 36 of Nigeria’s Constitution guarantees every accused person the opportunity to defend themselves and urged Kanu to take advantage of that provision
“I appeal to the defendant to use the opportunity granted by the constitution to present his defence,” the judge said.
The Nnamdi Kanu court ruling followed the withdrawal of Kanu’s entire defence team led by Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), who told the court that they were stepping aside out of respect for their client’s decision to represent himself. Other senior advocates, including Onyechi Ikpeazu, Joseph Akubo, Paul Erokoro, and Emeka Etiaba, also formally withdrew from the case.
Following their withdrawal, Justice Omotosho asked Nnamdi Kanu if he was ready to proceed, to which Kanu replied that he would conduct his own defence. However, he objected once again, insisting that the Nnamdi Kanu court ruling should address the question of jurisdiction before proceeding with trial.
Kanu listed four grounds for his objection:
- The Federal Government’s alleged contempt of a Court of Appeal judgment that he claimed ordered his acquittal.
- The assertion that the laws under which he was charged — the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013 and the Customs and Excise Act — had been repealed.
- His alleged denial of fair hearing due to limited access to his legal team while in DSS custody.
- His claim that a medical report certifying him fit for trial was forged.
The prosecution, led by Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), countered these claims, arguing that the Court of Appeal decision referenced by Kanu had been set aside by the Supreme Court in a judgment delivered on Dec. 15, 2023. http://nairametrics.com Awomolo insisted that the Nnamdi Kanu court ruling should proceed based on established precedent.
He added that Kanu’s claim of a forged medical report was baseless and amounted to an indictment of his previous lawyers, who had reviewed the same report without objection.
Justice Omotosho noted that the medical report had been duly admitted into evidence and that the court had already acted upon it. As such, the court could not revisit or invalidate earlier decisions based on that report. The Nnamdi Kanu court ruling, he clarified, stood on solid legal grounds.
The judge further recalled that during previous sittings, Kanu had been given ample opportunity for private consultation with his lawyers, including an extended session between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. to ensure compliance with fair hearing standards.
Despite overruling Kanu’s objection, Justice Omotosho stated that the defendant could still raise his concerns during his final written address. The Nnamdi Kanu court ruling therefore directed him to open his defence, emphasizing that failure to do so would be considered a waiver of his constitutional right.
“This is your constitutional right to defend yourself,” Omotosho said. “You may exercise or waive it — but the court will not wait indefinitely.”
At that stage, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), who had earlier withdrawn from the case, appealed to the court to grant Kanu time to gather his thoughts. Kanu, echoing this request, said he had not been given enough time to prepare for his defence under Section 36 of the Constitution.
Following no objection from the prosecution, Justice Omotosho adjourned the matter until Oct. 24, 2025, for continuation of the Nnamdi Kanu court ruling proceedings. The judge disclosed that witness summonses requested by Kanu had been signed and were ready for service on the individuals listed as potential witnesses.
The Nnamdi Kanu court ruling underscores the court’s determination to ensure due process while maintaining the integrity of its previous judgments in the high-profile terrorism trial. Visit http://gmtnewsng.com for more news.
