The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has vowed to resist the recent ruling of the Court of Appeal in Abuja, which upheld the proscription of IPOB and reaffirmed its designation as a terrorist organization.
On Thursday, January 31, 2025, the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal upheld an earlier order issued by Justice Abdu Kafarati of the Federal High Court, Abuja, affirming IPOB’s proscription. The ruling reinforced the Federal Government’s stance that the group’s activities pose a threat to national security.
In reaction to the judgment, Kanu expressed his intention to challenge the ruling through legal means, asserting that the decision failed to align with the Nigerian Constitution and relevant legal statutes. He argued that the proscription order was obtained ex parte—meaning it was granted without IPOB being given an opportunity to be heard—contrary to the legal procedures required for such declarations.
Speaking during a routine meeting with his legal team at the Department of State Services (DSS) facility in Abuja, Kanu reiterated his stance on the matter. His lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, later issued a statement outlining their legal position.
Ejimakor, in his statement, described the ruling as “infamous” and assured the public that it would be vigorously contested through both domestic and international legal channels.
“We maintain that the proscription of IPOB violated the principles of fair hearing, as IPOB was neither notified nor given the opportunity to defend itself before the proscription order was issued,” Ejimakor stated.
He also pointed out procedural irregularities in the proscription process, highlighting that:
The Federal High Court granted the proscription order via an ex parte application, rather than through a formal hearing before a judge, as required by law.
The order was signed by the late Abba Kyari, rather than by former President Muhammadu Buhari, which they argue rendered it legally invalid.
Despite acknowledging these procedural concerns, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, citing national security as a justification for overriding constitutional provisions.
Kanu’s legal team has indicated that they will pursue further legal actions, both within Nigerian courts and at the international level, to challenge the legitimacy of the ruling.
As the legal battle continues, the decision remains a controversial point of debate, drawing reactions from both IPOB supporters and government authorities. The case is expected to further shape discussions on civil rights, legal due process, and national security considerations in Nigeria.
