IPOB Debunks Claim That Nnamdi Kanu Forfeited Right to Defense, Calls Ongoing Trial a “Political Show

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has dismissed as “fake news” recent media reports claiming that its detained leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has forfeited his right to defense in his ongoing trial before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

In a statement released on Saturday by its spokesperson, Comrade Emma Powerful, IPOB described the reports as a “desperate lie” aimed at deceiving the public and giving legitimacy to what it called an “illegal process.”

 “Let it be made clear: Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has not forfeited anything. What is happening is not a fair trial — it’s a political show,” the statement read.

The pro-Biafra group accused both Justice Omotosho and the government’s lead prosecutor, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), of failing to cite any existing law that Kanu is alleged to have violated. IPOB argued that the continued prosecution of its leader contradicts Section 36(12) of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, which states that no one can be convicted of an offense unless that offense is clearly defined in a written law.

 “A person shall not be convicted of a criminal offence unless that offence is defined and the penalty therefor is prescribed in a written law.”

IPOB further pointed to several Supreme Court decisions — including Aoko v. Fagbemi (1961), A.G. Federation v. Abubakar (2007), and NNPC v. Fawehinmi (1998) — to support its position that “where there is no law, there can be no trial or conviction.”

The statement accused Justice Omotosho of “abusing judicial power” by insisting that Kanu must open his defense despite the absence of a defined criminal charge.

 “You cannot force a man to defend himself against a ghost charge,” IPOB stated. “This is a violation of fair hearing and an embarrassment to Nigeria’s legal system.”

The group also criticized reports that the judge intends to deliver judgment without entertaining final addresses from both the prosecution and defense — a move IPOB described as “laughable and alien to criminal procedure.”

 “If that’s true, then Justice Omotosho needs to revisit the basics of due process. No judge should act as prosecutor and arbiter at the same time,” the group said.

Reaffirming its support for Kanu’s refusal to participate in what it termed an “illegal trial,” IPOB urged Nigerians to read Section 36(12) of the Constitution for themselves, arguing that it protects every citizen from “judicial tyranny.”