Nnamdi Kanu’s Wife Rejects Court Ruling

Uchechi Okwu-Kanu has condemned the life imprisonment sentence given to her husband, Nnamdi Kanu, by the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The ruling, delivered by Justice James Omotosho, sparked fresh debate across the country and beyond, as reactions continue to pour in from supporters, analysts, and rights groups.

The court jailed the IPOB leader for declaring the sit-at-home order in the South-East, which the judge said was enforced through threats and acts of violence. He also received additional sentences of 20 years and five years on other charges. The case drew widespread attention because of the weight of the allegations and the political tension surrounding IPOB activities.

Uchechi responded online, accusing the judge of ruling with bias and ignoring legal standards. She said the court relied on an outdated terrorism law, which she described as invalid since a newer Act has replaced it. She argued that no court should base a conviction on a law that no longer applies and insisted that this alone made the judgment unlawful.

She also accused the court of using claims that were never presented during the trial. According to her, some allegations cited in the judgment did not appear in the charge sheet or in witness testimonies. She argued that no judge has the authority to add new claims that were never raised in court.

She further criticised the court for neglecting international legal requirements. She said that since the government accused Kanu of committing offences while in Kenya, the court should have checked whether those acts were crimes in that country and whether any evidence was provided. She argued that no documents or testimony from Kenyan authorities were presented, which meant the court lacked the basis to proceed with those parts of the case.

She concluded that the judgment failed to meet constitutional standards, claiming it blocked her husband’s right to defend himself and ignored key legal issues raised during the trial. She insisted that the ruling would not survive an appeal and said it raised questions about judicial conduct.

The sentence has stirred strong reactions across Nigeria, especially in the South-East, where Kanu has a wide base of loyal supporters. Human rights groups and legal experts have also weighed in, raising concerns about the handling of the trial and what it could mean for other political and separatist cases in the future.