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 refuted by U.S.-based pro-Igbo advocacy groups, who call it a “fabrication” meant to demonize Kanu.
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 during 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 during the court hearings in his ruling.
The group added, “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 honestly and without fear of rebuttal: Throughout the entire trial, no witness ever brought up this claim, nor was it ever charged, testified to, or presented as evidence.
They said, “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 organizations maintained that nothing at all related to such an accusation was ever made during the hearings before Justice Omotosho. “No plan to bomb US or UK embassies was alleged. There was no testimony from a prosecution witness regarding any such scheme. They added, “No document, exhibit, audio, video, or intelligence report was tendered to substantiate such a claim.
Since this matter never came up in court, the defense was unable to cross-examine any witnesses on it. However, in his opinion, Justice Omotosho recounted this bizarre tale of a purported plot to destroy the American and British missions in a nonchalant manner. There is no error here. It is not real.
The groups declared their intention to make the complete certified transcripts of the court’s proceedings available in order to support their claim. “Those transcripts will clearly show that no prosecutor, no witness, and no 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 claimed that the alleged “bomb plot” only existed in the verdict and not in the supporting documentation.
When the transcripts were made available, they asked the public, embassies, human rights organizations, and Nigerian and foreign media to examine them. “We invite Nigerian media, foreign media, 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.”
The organizations contended that, considering Kanu’s well-known attitude toward the US and the West, the assertion was not only untrue but also nonsensical. The first and only Trump Solidarity Rally was organized by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in 2017 at Igweocha (Port Harcourt), when thousands of people marched peacefully in open support of the US president at the time.
They stated, “He personally attended a Trump campaign rally in Des Moines, Iowa, in 2020, openly identifying with the American democratic process.”
“This is not the behavior of a man who is planning to bomb missions in the US or the UK. These are the deeds of a guy who, whether correctly or incorrectly, views the West and the United States as allies in the fight for justice and self-determination.
It is not just dishonest but also risky for a Nigerian judge to fabricate a “terror plot” based on this history. They emphasized, “It conveys to the world that Nigerian courts are prepared to use lies as a weapon against political defendants.”
The coalition claims that the purported falsification essentially calls into question the verdict as a whole. “The offense must be clearly stated in a valid law, the accused must have a fair chance to contest any allegation, and a person can only be convicted on evidence presented in court,” they stated.
According to the coalition, “Justice Omotosho violated Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s right to a fair hearing; turned himself into a prosecution witness and propagandist; and built his judgment on facts that do not exist in the record by importing a serious accusation that was never charged, was never proven, and was never put to the accused.”
“Once a judge bases a criminal conviction on fabricated, extraneous material, the entire judgment is poisoned,” they said. It is unconstitutional, legally dangerous, and morally reprehensible.
They argued that this one act of fabrication “is sufficient, 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 cautioned that the ramifications extend beyond Kanu’s specific case, saying, “The judiciary itself is in trouble when a judge in a criminal trial descends into the arena of fabrication and lies.”
“Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, this is no longer about just one man. 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 utilized as a weapon to undermine political rivals, they stated.
“Justice Omotosho’s actions send the worst message possible on a national and international level. It informs the world that Nigerian courts can be utilized to fabricate “terrorists” on paper while disregarding the real evidence. “We won’t let this go unnoticed,” the coalition contended.
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 verdict, request an investigation from the NJC, and interact directly with U.S. and U.K. authorities to reveal what they called a false narrative.
“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,” they declared.
The judgment is tarnished by it. The court is discolored by it. Furthermore, it will continue to be a disgrace on the Nigerian judiciary unless it is categorically rejected.
They said, “We are determined to expose this fabrication with documents, with transcripts, and with the cold, hard truth in a way Justice Omotosho never imagined possible.”
