 |
| Nnamdi Kanu in one of numerous court appearances |
A federal high court in Abuja has found Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), guilty on the first of seven terrorism charges.
The conviction comes after the judge cited evidence, including video interviews, showing Kanu making violent threats against Nigeria and its citizens.
The court’s first count centered on a September 2021 broadcast in which Kanu allegedly threatened that “people would die” and foretold that “the whole world would standstill,” with the aim of intimidating the population.
Prosecutors argued that this broadcast constituted an act of terrorism under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2015.
During deliberations, Judge James Omotosho reviewed video clips presented by the prosecution, highlighting Kanu’s violent rhetoric and threatening tone. The judge stated that Kanu’s intentions were clearly rooted in violence, asserting that the threats were not only credible but actively carried out by his followers.
Omotosho emphasized that Kanu’s repeated refusal to clarify the context of his statements only strengthened the case against him.
“His belief in violence was unmistakable,” the judge declared, concluding that Kanu committed preparatory acts of terrorism.
“His intention was quite clear as he believed in violence. These threats of violence were nothing but terrorist acts, which were duly carried out by his followers. He was consumed by violence and didn’t mind if his own people died in the process. It is clear that the defendant carried out preparatory acts of terrorism,” the judge said.
Noting that Kanu repeatedly refused opportunities to explain the context of the broadcasts, he declared: “Consequently, the defendant is hereby convicted with respect to count one,” Omotosho said.
However, this conviction raises eyebrows when considering the broader environment in Nigeria, where notorious terrorists responsible for bombings, killings, and territorial capture often receive presidential pardons or go unpunished, some Nigerians opine.
The disparity in justice, they argue, begs the question: Why are lesser threats, like Kanu’s, met with conviction, while bloodshed by real terrorists is often overlooked?
As the court continues to deliver judgments on the remaining charges, many wonder whether justice here is more about optics than facts.
0 comments:
Post a Comment