Premium News
Following the judgment, Sowore maintained that what transpired was the fulfillment of a political directive rather than a judicial process.
Human rights activist and former presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), Omoyele Sowore, has described Thursday’s judgment in the trial of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu as a “political decision long taken by the government” before the court delivered its ruling.
Sowore, who had earlier issued warnings about the direction of the case, reiterated that the outcome was predetermined by the Bola Tinubu’s administration.
“On November 5th, 2025, I publicly warned that the verdict in Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s case had already been decided by the Bola Ahmed Tinubu regime. Today, they executed that script word for word,” he said.
Following the judgment, Sowore maintained that what transpired was the fulfillment of a political directive rather than a judicial process.
“What we witnessed today was not justice, it was the execution of a political decision already taken long before the court sat, long before arguments were heard, and long before any evidence was considered.”
He concluded with a call for national reflection, saying: “Nigeria must decide what kind of nation it wants to be.”
He recalled his earlier alert on the ruling which was based on credible information from individuals within the government.
“For the avoidance of doubt and to alert the public, it has become clear that a secret decision has long been reached within the @officialABAT regime regarding the fate of @MaziNnamdiKanu. The plan, devised through a high-level political conspiracy, is to either sentence him to death or condemn him to life imprisonment. This outcome, predetermined far in advance, is now being dressed up in the guise of judicial procedure.”
According to him, the conduct of the trial and the interpretation expected from the court indicated an attempt to legitimise a pre-arranged conclusion.
“Justice James Omotosho is expected to conclude Kanu’s trial by declaring that his refusal to open his defence amounts to an admission of guilt — a convenient interpretation designed to seal a verdict already agreed upon behind closed doors.”
Sowore had also drawn historical parallels to the November 1995 execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni activists.
“The ruling is anticipated this November, a month that bears a haunting historical precedent. It was in November 1995 that the military tribunal of General Sani Abacha sentenced Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni activists to death, a sentence carried out with ruthless precision.”
“Today, three decades later, Nigeria stands at the same moral crossroads. Only the year has changed; this is 2025, not 1995, but the machinery of repression grinds on.”
He insisted that Kanu’s trial had shifted from a legal matter to a moral test for the nation.
“The trial of Nnamdi Kanu has ceased to be about justice; it is now a test of conscience for the Nigerian state and its citizens alike.”
SaharaReporters had reported that the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday convicted the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, on all the charges against him after holding that Kanu did not enter a defence or offer any explanation to counter the prosecution’s evidence.
Delivering the ruling, Justice James Omotosho stated that the prosecution’s case stood unchallenged following Kanu’s refusal to properly present a defence and his removal from the courtroom earlier in the day over repeated unruly behaviour.
Justice James Omotosho had on Monday ordered that proceedings — including the delivery of judgment — would continue in the absence of Nnamdi Kanu, citing the IPOB leader’s persistent “unruly behaviour” in the courtroom.
In his judgment, Justice James Omotosho held that Kanu’s declaration of a “sit-at-home” order across the Southeast —accompanied by threats and enforced through violence — amounted to a terrorist act.
The court noted that the defendant had no legal authority to restrict the movement of citizens, emphasising that only the President of Nigeria, under Section 305 of the Constitution, can impose movement restrictions through emergency powers.
“The people of the Southeast cannot be ordered to sit at home by a person who is not a recognised official of the Federal Government or any state government,” the judge held.
Justice Omotosho cited evidence from prosecution witness PW4, who served in Imo State and testified that the Monday sit-at-home order had for years left towns and even farmlands deserted.
The judge concluded that the prosecution successfully established the elements of count two, which charged Kanu with professing to be a member and leader of IPOB, a proscribed organisation, contrary to Section 16 of the Terrorism Prevention Act.
“Consequently, the defendant is hereby convicted on count two,” Justice Omotosho pronounced.
