BREAKING: Nnamdi Kanu Files Appeal to Stop Justice Omotosho’s Judgment in His Ongoing Trial

The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a fresh motion before the Court of Appeal in Abuja to halt the upcoming 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 stop Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, from delivering judgment on November 20, 2025.

In the motion filed on Wednesday, November 12, 2025, the IPOB leader personally prayed the court for “An Order staying the proceedings of the trial court in Case No. FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015: Federal Republic of Nigeria VS. Nnamdi Kanu currently pending before Justice James K. Omotosho pending the, hearing and determination of the appeal pending against its decisions in the case, particularly on:

“Its decision on the No Case Submission; its refusal to determine its jurisdiction and the validity of the counts under which the Appellant is being tried; its foreclosure of the Appellant’s right to defend the case by fielding witnesses.”

According to his lawyer, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, who confirmed the development, Kanu’s application was filed in person at the Court of Appeal registry.

He said the motion seeks to ensure that the lower court does not proceed with judgment until key jurisdictional issues are settled.

Kanu argued that despite raising serious constitutional questions before the Federal High Court, the trial judge declined to determine them.

He also claimed that the court “refused to evaluate the evidence of the prosecution witnesses vis-à-vis the cross-examination questions to determine whether the evidence was discredited under cross examination.”

He further noted that although he had already filed a list of witnesses to defend himself, the trial court refused to entertain the defence until the day of judgment.

Kanu warned that if the request is not granted, he might be “unlawfully convicted without being afforded the opportunity of knowing the validity of the counts, the jurisdiction of the trial court and offering defence on the merit.”

He added that granting the motion would not harm the prosecution, pointing out that the case has been dragging since 2015 and deserves fair treatment.