Special Counsel to the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, has faulted the Federal High Court in Abuja for sentencing Kanu under a terrorism law that was repealed three years before his conviction.
Kanu was convicted on November 20, 2025, on six terrorism-related charges and handed five life sentences and 20 years’ imprisonment on one count, all running concurrently. The charges were brought under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013 (TPAA 2013).
However, Ejimakor said the 2013 Act had been repealed and replaced by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022 (TPPA 2022), which prescribes lighter penalties for similar offences.
In a detailed legal analysis released on Tuesday, the Special Counsel argued that applying the repealed 2013 law was a “fundamental legal error,” insisting that the 2022 Act — being more lenient — should have been applied based on the lex mitior principle. The principle requires courts to adopt the lesser penalty when a newer law reduces the severity of punishment.
Ejimakor explained that the 2013 Act carried harsh, deterrent-heavy penalties, often defaulting to life imprisonment or death for terrorism-related conduct, including incitement. By contrast, the 2022 Act provides more proportionate penalties, ranging between 10 and 20 years for non-lethal incitement and 5–10 years for membership of a proscribed group.
“The TPPA 2022 prescribes lighter punishments for the relevant offences, which should have been applied retroactively to mitigate Kanu’s sentence,”
Ejimakor said, adding that the older law had been criticised globally for excessive severity.
Kanu’s conviction covered allegations of incitement through broadcasts aimed at intimidating the public, professing membership of IPOB, encouraging attacks on security personnel, making statements linked to the EndSARS protests, and issuing threats that allegedly disrupted socio-economic activities.
Ejimakor noted that under the repealed 2013 Act, many of these offences attracted mandatory life sentences. But the 2022 Act introduced fixed-term punishments, capping most of the charges at 20 years.
He argued that if the court had applied the correct law, Kanu’s sentences would have been drastically reduced. Membership of a proscribed organisation would carry a maximum of 10 years, while incitement-related offences would attract 10–20 years.
Ejimakor further cited several Supreme Court decisions — including A.G. Federation v. Isah (2021) and Omoijahe v. State (1999) — to support his position that while saving clauses allow prosecution under repealed laws, they do not allow courts to impose harsher penalties that no longer exist.
According to him, once TPPA 2022 came into force, “the repealed law no longer existed for sentencing purposes.”
With Kanu having spent six years in detention before conviction, Ejimakor argued that the IPOB leader’s maximum lawful sentence under the 2022 Act would effectively reduce to about 20 years, far below the life sentences imposed.
He urged the judiciary and legal community to acknowledge what he described as a “serious miscarriage of justice” arising from reliance on an obsolete law.
Leave a Reply