The accusation made in Justice James Omotosho’s ruling that Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), planned to bomb American and British missions in Nigeria has been denied by U.S.-based pro-Igbo advocacy groups, which characterize it as a “fabrication” meant to demonize him.
The American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID) President, Dr. Sylvester Onyia; U.S.-based Catholic priest and Rising Sun Coordinator, Rev. Fr. Augustine Odimmegwa; and Executive Director of Ambassador for Self-Determination, Ben Nwankwo, all discussed the position at a joint press conference in the United States on Friday.
The groups said in their statement, “Justice Omotosho’s Fictional ‘Bomb Plot’ Against U.S. and UK Missions: A Manufactured Lie That Collapses His Judgment Against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” that the judge had included a story that had never been mentioned in any of the court hearings.
The group stated, “We address you today on one central, shocking point in the judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu: the claim that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu planned to bomb the British and United States missions in Nigeria.”
“We declare frankly and without fear of rebuttal: Throughout the entire trial, this accusation was never charged, never testified to, never tendered in evidence, and never referenced by any witness.
They declared, “It is a pure invention of the judge, inserted into the judgment to demonize Mazi Nnamdi Kanu before the world and to drive a wedge between him and the governments of the United States and the United Kingdom.”
The groups said that nothing at all related to such an accusation was ever made during the hearings before Justice Omotosho. There was no accusation of a plot to bomb US or UK embassies. No prosecution witness provided testimony regarding any such conspiracy. They said, “No document, exhibit, audio, video, or intelligence report was tendered to support such a claim.”
Since this matter never came up in court, the defense was unable to cross-examine any witnesses. However, in his opinion, Justice Omotosho penned this bizarre account of a purported plot to destroy the American and British missions in a nonchalant manner. This is not an error. It’s a lie.
The groups declared their intention to make available the complete certified transcripts of the court’s sessions in order to support their claim. “Those transcripts will clearly demonstrate that no prosecutor, witness, or document ever mentioned any threat to US or UK missions; the only people who testified against Mazi Nnamdi Kanu were hired storytellers, and even they did not tell this particular story,” they stated.
They said that “the so-called ‘bomb plot’ exists only in the judgment, not in the evidence.”
When the transcripts were made public, they allowed Nigerian and foreign journalists, human rights organizations, diplomats, and the general public to examine them. “We invite Nigerian media, international press, diplomats, and human rights organizations to review the record and determine the extent to which a Federal High Court judge was willing to go in order to support an unsupported conviction.”
Given Kanu’s well-known attitude toward the United States and the West, the groups contended that the accusation was not only untrue but also nonsensical. In Igweocha (Port Harcourt), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu organized the first and only Trump Solidarity Rally in 2017. Thousands of people peacefully marched in open support of the US president at the time.
They said that he openly identified with the American political process when personally attending a Trump campaign event in Des Moines, Iowa, in 2020.
“A individual who is planning to bomb US or UK missions is not acting in this manner. These are the acts of a guy who, whether correctly or incorrectly, views the West and the United States as allies in the fight for justice and autonomy.
It is hazardous as well as dishonest for a Nigerian judge to turn this history into a fictional “terror plot.” They emphasized, “It sends a message to the world that Nigerian courts are willing to weaponize lies against political defendants.”
The coalition claims that the entire ruling is fundamentally undermined by the purported fabrication. “The accused must have a fair chance to contest any allegation, the offense must be clearly written in a valid law, and a person can only be convicted on evidence presented in court,” they stated.
“By importing a serious accusation that was never charged, was never proven, and was never put to the accused, Justice Omotosho violated Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s right to a fair hearing; turned himself from an impartial judge into a prosecution witness and propagandist; and built his judgment on facts that do not exist in the record,” the coalition noted.
“Once a judge bases a criminal conviction on fabricated, extraneous material, the entire judgment is poisoned,” they continued. It is unconstitutional, morally reprehensible, and legally dangerous.
They argued that “this single act of fabrication is enough, on its own, to nullify the judgment, justify its reversal on appeal, and trigger serious disciplinary action by the National Judicial Council (NJC).”
The organizations said, “When a judge in a criminal trial descends into the arena of fabrication and lies, the judiciary itself is in trouble,” warning that the consequences extend beyond Kanu’s specific case.
Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is no longer the focus of this. It concerns whether any Nigerian can have faith that our courts would make decisions based on facts rather than preconceived notions, that judges will honor the record rather than alter it, and that the bench won’t be used as a weapon to undermine political rivals, they stated.
“Justice Omotosho’s actions convey the worst conceivable message both at home and abroad. It informs the world that Nigerian courts can fabricate “terrorists” on paper while disregarding the real evidence. The coalition contended, “We will not let this go unnoticed.
They outlined their next course of action, stating that they would publish transcripts of the proceedings as soon as possible before “they falsify it,” file the necessary appeals contesting the ruling, request an investigation from the NJC, and work directly with U.S. and U.K. authorities to expose what they called a false narrative.
They declared, “The attempt to portray Mazi Nnamdi Kanu as a man who intended to bomb US and UK missions is a fallacy from the pit of propaganda, not from a court of law.”
It tarnishes the verdict. The court has a stain on it. Additionally, it will continue to be a stain on the Nigerian judiciary unless it is categorically rejected.
“With documents, transcripts, and the cold, hard truth, we are determined to expose this fabrication in a way Justice Omotosho never imagined possible,” they insisted.
