Nnamdi Kanu’s Brother Warns Critics, Says Persecutors Will Face Reckoning

ByQncNews2 days Ago1 Mins read85

Prince Emmanuel Kanu, the younger brother of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has issued a strong warning to those he accused of persecuting and mocking his brother, saying they would soon face a reckoning.

Prince Emmanuel made the remarks in a post shared on his Facebook page on Monday, reacting to the conviction and life sentence handed to the IPOB leader by the Federal High Court in Abuja. He also addressed individuals who have taken to social media to mock Nnamdi Kanu following the judgment.

Justice James Omotosho had sentenced the IPOB leader to life imprisonment, and Kanu is currently serving the sentence at the Sokoto Prison. Since the ruling, reactions have continued to trail the case, drawing sharp divisions across political and social lines.

In his post, Prince Emmanuel accused certain individuals and institutions of celebrating what he described as injustice. He warned that those involved in what he called the wrongful conviction and imprisonment of his brother would ultimately face the consequences of their actions.

UK Faces Several Weather Alerts, Including Amber Snow Warning for Northern England

“Those praising evil and illegitimately targeting Mazi Nnamdi Kanu through mockery and imprisonment will soon face inevitable reckoning,” he said. According to him, the same coordinated efforts used to secure the conviction would eventually turn against those responsible.

He further alleged that attempts to exploit the law to silence his brother would fail, insisting that justice would prevail in the end. Prince Emmanuel claimed that those behind the judgment would become victims of the very systems they relied on, as their actions would backfire under what he described as “superior laws.”

Nnamdi Kanu was convicted on November 20, 2025, on terrorism-related charges filed by the Federal Government. However, the IPOB leader and his legal team have strongly faulted the judgment. They argue that the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act of 2013, under which he was charged, had already been repealed by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act of 2022, rendering the conviction legally flawed.

The case continues to generate intense debate, with supporters calling for justice and critics questioning the legal basis of the ruling.