The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, will today know his fate as the Federal High Court in Abuja delivers judgment in his long-running terrorism trial against the Federal Government.

Justice James Omotosho is expected to rule on multiple applications filed by both parties, including Kanu’s bid to challenge the validity of the charges against him and to secure his release on grounds of alleged unlawful detention and violation of his fundamental rights.

Kanu has been in the custody of the Department of State Services since June 2021, following his controversial return from Kenya, a process his legal team insists amounted to “extraordinary rendition.” He faces seven terrorism-related counts, including allegations of incitement, leadership of an unlawful group and conduct threatening national security, charges he has consistently denied.

Justice Omotosho, on November 7, fixed today for judgment after ruling that Kanu had forfeited his right to present a defence, having failed to utilise the six days allocated to him after the prosecution closed its case on June 19, 2025.

The judge noted that the matter, filed in 2015, had suffered protracted delays before being reassigned to his court, where it received accelerated hearing. The prosecution called five witnesses, tendered several exhibits and closed its case. Kanu, who initially agreed to enter his defence, later filed a fresh motion arguing that the terrorism law under which he is being tried had been repealed.

He asked the court to strike out the charges, expunge the plea of not guilty entered for him, and declare the proceedings a nullity. But Omotosho held that Kanu could not claim denial of fair hearing after refusing to utilise the opportunity to defend himself, citing Supreme Court authorities which state that a court cannot compel a defendant to enter a defence.

Kanu’s legal journey has been marked by appeals, adjournments, and conflicting court orders. In October 2022, the Court of Appeal discharged him and ordered his release, citing violations of international law in his rendition. The Federal Government appealed to the Supreme Court, which upturned the decision and remitted the case for trial.

His continued detention has attracted widespread national and international interest, with various socio-cultural groups, political actors, and rights organisations calling for his release as a means of calming rising insecurity in the South-East. The Federal Government insists he must face trial.

The outcome of today’s judgment is widely viewed as critical, not only for Kanu’s liberty but for ongoing conversations around political reconciliation, national unity and security in the region.

Security has been strengthened around the Federal High Court in Abuja, where supporters, journalists and observers have converged for what is considered one of Nigeria’s most sensitive political trials in recent years.

In Kanu’s home state of Abia, the police say they are not taking chances. Police spokesperson ASP Maureen Chinaka said the Commissioner of Police, Danladi Isa, has deployed strategic security measures to maintain peace irrespective of the judgment’s outcome.

“Abia is safe. Officers are on ground 24/7, and we are partnering with other security agencies to ensure the maintenance of law and order,” she said.

She noted that the state already conducts routine Monday patrols to counter potential unrest and expressed confidence that there would be no breakdown of order on Thursday.

In Enugu, the Police Public Relations Officer, Daniel Ndukwe, dismissed suggestions of unrest, responding, “Have you seen the judgment that he is going to be convicted?”

Efforts to get comments from the Force Public Relations Officer, Benjamin Hundeyin, were unsuccessful.

Meanwhile, Kanu has filed a criminal complaint before a Chief Magistrate’s Court in Abuja, accusing two DSS witnesses of giving false evidence during his trial.

The complaint, dated November 13 and obtained by our correspondent, lists the Attorney General of the Federation, the Director General of the DSS, and the two witnesses, identified as TAA (PW1) and BBB (PW2), as defendants.

Kanu alleges that both witnesses committed perjury during the trial-within-trial conducted between May and July 2025, particularly regarding their roles in his 2015 and 2021 statements in DSS custody. He claims TAA falsely denied knowing a senior DSS officer who allegedly supervised his 2015 interrogation and that BBB contradicted his own testimony regarding a July 17, 2021 video interview.

He argues that their testimonies were intended to obscure the true chain of custody of his statements.

Kanu has also filed a suit at the Court of Appeal seeking to stop the Federal High Court from delivering today’s judgment. As of press time, no hearing date has been fixed and no order has been issued by the appellate court.