In a recent interview on Channels TV on November 22, 2025, Adebayo Ojo, former Attorney General of Oyo State, described Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), as exceptionally fortunate to have avoided the death penalty following his conviction under Nigeria’s Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act (TPPA) 2022.
Ojo explained that the offenses for which Kanu was convicted including financing terrorism, membership in an unlawful society, and other related charges carry mandatory capital punishment under the law.
According to the TPPA 2022, once a court establishes guilt for these crimes, the presiding judge has no discretion in sentencing; the law explicitly prescribes death as the only lawful penalty.
“Kanu is a very lucky man; the judge was very fair to him,” Ojo said, expressing genuine surprise at the outcome of the trial. He noted that the legal framework is clear and unambiguous, leaving little room for deviation. “The statute is very strict. Once someone is found guilty of these offenses, the death penalty is the automatic sentence. There is no room for negotiation or leniency under the law,” he added.
Ojo attributed Kanu’s reprieve to the discretion exercised by Justice Binta Nyako, who presided over the trial. The judge openly acknowledged that her decision to impose life imprisonment rather than death represented a deliberate departure from the statutory mandate, balancing justice with mercy. Humanitarian considerations and Nigeria’s de facto moratorium on executions, in effect since 2016, informed her judgment.
“The judge clearly tempered justice with mercy. She took into account broader humanitarian factors and the reality that Nigeria has not carried out executions for years. That is why Kanu received life imprisonment instead of the mandatory death penalty,” Ojo explained.
Legal analysts have noted that Justice Nyako’s decision sets a precedent, demonstrating that even in cases with strict statutory penalties, judges may sometimes consider extrajudicial factors such as human rights norms, health, or international perceptions. However, Ojo expressed concern that such discretion, though rare, could be viewed as inconsistent with the letter of the law.
He further emphasized that Kanu’s case underscores the severity with which Nigeria treats terrorism-related offenses. “The law is very clear. Those who finance terrorism or belong to unlawful societies put themselves at the highest level of legal risk. Kanu’s life sentence, rather than death, is unusual and reflects a measure of judicial leniency that is not guaranteed for others,” he said.
Ojo concluded by reiterating the importance of adhering to statutory provisions to maintain public confidence in the justice system. He warned that deviation from legislated sentences should be exceptional and carefully justified, lest it undermines the deterrent effect intended by the TPPA.
If you love political news or like to get more news happening around the globe, use the button below to get more verified news happening around Nigeria and the world today.
Leave a Reply