Federal High Court Denies Viral Claims of Assassination Attempt on Justice Omotosho After Nnamdi Kanu’s Sentencing

The Federal High Court has strongly refuted widespread claims circulating on social media alleging that Justice James Omotosho survived an assassination attempt shortly after sentencing the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, to life imprisonment. The claims, which originated from a Facebook blogger, suggested that the judge was attacked by unknown assailants and later rushed to a hospital. The report spread rapidly across various online platforms, causing anxiety among the public and fueling conversations around the politically sensitive case.

In a detailed statement released on Sunday, the Chief Registrar of the Federal High Court, Sulaiman Hassan, described the viral claims as completely fabricated and crafted to mislead Nigerians. According to him, the judiciary considers such publications dangerous, especially at a time when tension surrounding the case remains high.

The statement, titled “Rebuttal to False Publication by Celebrity Blogger on the Alleged Assassination Attempt on Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court”, firmly rejected the online narrative. It read, “The attention of the Federal High Court has been drawn to a publication by Celebrity Blogger alleging that the Honourable Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court Abuja survived an assassination attempt following the life sentence imposed on Nnamdi Kanu. We hereby firmly and unequivocally declare that the report is completely false and unfounded. The public is advised to treat this publication as fake news and refrain from further dissemination to prevent the spread of misinformation.”

Hassan expressed concern over the motive behind the false story. He noted that the publication lacked evidence, official confirmation, or credible witnesses, yet circulated widely enough to cause fear, stir emotions, and potentially weaken public trust in the judiciary. He warned that such actions could contribute to instability and embolden individuals who may attempt to intimidate judicial officers.

The Chief Registrar stressed that spreading false information about judicial authorities, particularly concerning sensitive cases, is a serious offence under Nigerian law. He called on law enforcement agencies, cybercrime units, and regulatory bodies to investigate the matter thoroughly. He insisted that the individuals responsible for the publication must be identified, arrested, and prosecuted under laws that address cybercrime, defamation, and deliberate misinformation. He said, “Given the gravity of the report, which has the potential to cause panic and undermine confidence in the judicial system, possibly intended as a form of intimidation, we call on the relevant security agencies and regulatory authorities to conduct a comprehensive investigation.”

The controversy follows Thursday’s high profile judgment in which Justice Omotosho sentenced Nnamdi Kanu to life imprisonment on several terrorism related charges. The ruling immediately triggered strong reactions across the country, especially among supporters of the Indigenous People of Biafra and human rights groups. Justice Omotosho stated that although the law allowed him to impose the death penalty on the counts that carried such punishment, he chose a more lenient path. “As a Christian, I chose to be merciful,” he said, quoting Matthew chapter twenty three verse twenty three.

Kanu was convicted on counts one, two, four, five, and six, all of which carried life sentences. He also received twenty years without an option of fine on count three and five years without an option of fine on count seven. The judge ordered that counts three and seven should run concurrently. The sentencing has since become one of the most consequential terrorism related rulings in recent years.

In addition to the prison terms, the court made several decisions concerning Kanu’s detention. Justice Omotosho directed that he be kept in protective custody outside the Kuje Correctional Centre due to previous security concerns at the facility. He also barred Kanu from using digital devices unless strictly supervised by the Office of the National Security Adviser.

Furthermore, the court ordered the forfeiture of Kanu’s radio transmitter to the Federal Government. The Department of State Services was given permission to apply for forfeiture of other items after the ninety day appeal period.

While delivering the judgment, Justice Omotosho described Kanu as unruly and not remorseful. He stated that the defendant had shown a consistent tendency toward violence. He said, “I have no hesitation to conclude that the defendant has a tendency of violence and it has not left him.”

The Federal High Court noted that its rebuttal was necessary to prevent the spread of misinformation and to safeguard the integrity and independence of the judiciary. It urged members of the public to rely on verified information from credible institutions rather than social media publications designed to mislead and incite.