The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a new motion before the Court of Appeal in Abuja, seeking to halt the impending judgment in his ongoing trial.
Kanu, who has been in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) since his re-arrest, is asking the appellate court to restrain Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, from delivering judgment scheduled for November 20, 2025.
In the motion filed on Wednesday, November 12, 2025, Kanu personally urged the appellate court to issue “an order staying proceedings in Case No. FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015 – Federal Republic of Nigeria vs. Nnamdi Kanu – currently before Justice James K. Omotosho, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal against key rulings in the case.”
The IPOB leader specifically challenged the lower court’s:
– Decision on his no-case submission,
– Refusal to determine its jurisdiction and the validity of the charges against him, and
– Foreclosure of his right to defend the case by presenting witnesses.
Confirming the development, Kanu’s lawyer, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, said the motion was filed in person at the Court of Appeal registry.
Ejimakor explained that the application aims to ensure that the Federal High Court does not proceed with judgment until the appellate court rules on crucial constitutional and jurisdictional questions.
According to Kanu, despite raising substantial constitutional issues before the trial court, Justice Omotosho allegedly declined to address them. He further claimed the court failed to properly evaluate the testimony of prosecution witnesses against their cross-examination, which, he argued, could have exposed inconsistencies.
Kanu also said that although he had already submitted a list of witnesses for his defence, the court refused to allow him to present them before judgment.
He warned that if his request is denied, he risks being “unlawfully convicted without the opportunity to challenge the validity of the charges, the jurisdiction of the trial court, or to present a defence on the merits.”
Kanu added that granting his motion would not prejudice the prosecution, noting that the case, which began in 2015, has suffered multiple delays and deserves fair adjudication.
