Lawyer to Nnamdi Kanu, Onyedikachi Ifedi, has raised concerns over the delay in the hearing of his client’s appeal against his conviction and prison sentence.
In a statement dated September 10, 2026, Ifedi alleged that the Court of Appeal had yet to list the matter for hearing despite several legal issues raised by Kanu’s defence. Kanu filed his appeal against the November 20, 2025 conviction at the Court of Appeal in February 2026.
The lawyer also alleged that the Federal Government had not filed its response to the appeal within the period required by law.
According to Ifedi, the appeal raises questions about the legal foundation of Kanu’s conviction, the handling of earlier proceedings in the case and the legislation applicable to the terrorism charges.
“The federal government filed nothing. Time expired. No brief. No living section. No defence,” Ifedi stated.
He urged the Court of Appeal to list the case so that both sides could present their arguments and have the legal questions determined through the appellate process.
Ifedi also questioned aspects of Kanu’s earlier custody proceedings, particularly the relationship between an earlier discharge and subsequent orders affecting his detention. He argued that the appellate court should clarify the legal effect of those proceedings.
The lawyer further raised questions about the Supreme Court’s handling of some counts in Kanu’s case. According to him, certain counts had previously been quashed and should not have been revived or returned for further proceedings.
He also challenged the legal basis of the conviction delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja on November 20, 2025. The court convicted Kanu on all seven counts and sentenced him to life imprisonment on several of the counts, alongside additional prison terms on others.
Ifedi alleged that the trial court relied on the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which he argued had been repealed before the judgment.
“By the time the case reached Justice Omotosho, the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013 had been repealed,” he said.
He maintained that the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022 was the applicable legislation and argued that its transitional provisions should have been considered in determining how the proceedings were governed.
The lawyer cited the Supreme Court decision in State v. Egigia (2024) LPELR-62009(SC) in support of his argument concerning the application of written law in criminal proceedings.
Ifedi said the question of which terrorism legislation governed Kanu’s case should ultimately be determined by the appellate court.
He also alleged that the Attorney-General of the Federation had failed to file a brief in response to the appeal before the deadline expired.
“The chief law officer of the Federation had one job: defend the conviction or concede it. He did neither. He let time expire,” Ifedi alleged.
According to the lawyer, Kanu has opted to represent himself in the appeal and prepared a 115-page handwritten appellant’s brief containing eight issues for determination.
The issues reportedly cover questions relating to the applicable terrorism legislation, constitutional provisions and previous judicial decisions.
Kanu had earlier filed a notice of appeal seeking to have his conviction and sentence overturned. His appeal challenges the judgment delivered by Justice Omotosho after the Federal High Court convicted him on seven terrorism-related counts.
Ifedi is now calling for the appeal to be listed and heard, arguing that the legal questions raised by Kanu’s defence should be resolved through the judicial process.
He also called for clarification on the status of the appeal, the response from the Federal Government and the legislation under which Kanu’s November 20, 2025 conviction was entered.
The lawyer concluded by questioning the delay in listing the matter.
“Why has the Court of Appeal refused to list the appeal?”
Source: Court documents / statements from Kanu’s lawyer
