The UK government’s silence about the conviction and sentencing of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader Nnamdi Kanu has been denounced by a coalition of pan-Igbo self-determination campaigners.
In a joint statement on Tuesday, the Rising Sun Foundation (RSF), Ambassadors for Self-Determination (ASD), and American Veterans of Igbo Descent (AVID) accused the UK government of failing to protect its citizens. Kanu has a passport from the United Kingdom.
On November 20, 2025, the IPOB leader was found guilty of terrorist charges brought against him by the Nigerian government following a multi-year trial. James Omotosho presided over the Abuja Federal High Court, which found the agitator guilty and sentenced him to life in prison.
Kanu is presently incarcerated at the Nigeria Correctional Service’s Sokoto detention facility.
The pan-Igbo activists chastised the UK government in a statement co-signed by Dr. Sylvester Onyia, AVID, Evans Nwankwo, ASD, and Maxwell Dede, RSF, for failing to act in Kanu’s case in the same way that it has been acting in comparable circumstances.
The statement, titled “Public briefing note on the UK government’s silence over the rendition, unlawful detention and life imprisonment of British citizen, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” called the British government’s silence concerning and inconsistent.
“On November 20, 2025, Nigeria’s Federal High Court (per Justice James Omotosho) sentenced Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, a British citizen, to life imprisonment under a repealed law, despite a binding Court of Appeal acquittal issued on October 13, 2022,” the statement stated.
The UK-Nigeria Extradition Treaty (2008), the European Convention on Extradition, the UN Convention Against Torture (Article 3), and Nigeria’s domestic laws, which prohibit trying a renditioned suspect, were all violated by the illegal rendition of Kanu from Kenya in June 2021.
The UK Government has not released a statement since the November 20 sentencing, despite the seriousness of these offenses and the fact that Kanu was kidnapped while holding a British passport and broadcasting peacefully from London, where IPOB is lawfully registered.
“This silence is unprecedented, concerning, and at odds with Britain’s international human rights stance.”
Concerned about the UK government’s silence following Kanu’s life sentence, the statement stated that the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) last spoke with Nigerian authorities on November 11, 2025, requesting “fair trial standards” and consular access.
“There has been no statement, no parliamentary briefing, no diplomatic protest, and no sanctioning of Nigerian officials since the life sentence,” the statement continued. The UK’s response to incidents involving significantly less serious infractions contrasts sharply with this quiet.
The UK’s lack of interest, according to the campaigners, “reads as tacit endorsement of a sham process.”
They also criticized the UK government for not protecting a British national who had been kidnapped overseas. The statement claims that the UK has not addressed the “fabricated claims in Omotosho’s judgment, including false allegations that Kanu threatened UK/US missions,” demanded compliance with the 2022 appellate discharge, rejected trial under a repealed terrorism statute, or condemned the international kidnapping of its citizen.
The campaigners stated, “The implication is that the UK is failing its own citizen, violating its duty of diplomatic protection.”
The statement noted that the UK has historically been vocal on cases involving detained activists like Alexei Navalny (Russia), Aung San Suu Kyi (Myanmar), Jimmy Lai (Hong Kong), and Julian Assange (Australia/US). It also accused the UK government of applying rule of law standards selectively. However, the UK has opted for silence over Kanu, a British person who faces rendition, torture, unlawful detention, and conviction under a legislation that has been repealed. This selective approach damages Britain’s reputation as a defender of due process and human rights.
The protestors also claimed that the UK government’s inaction was proof of prejudice and animosity toward the Igbo people.
“We make it very obvious that the UK’s silence is proof of ethnic animosity toward the Igbo. In addition to Omotosho’s claims of threats against UK/US missions, the Igbo diaspora views the UK’s inability to safeguard Kanu as part of a pattern of calculated neglect that is evocative of Britain’s participation during the Biafran War from 1967 to 1970.
According to the statement, “silence fosters mistrust and reinforces a belief that the UK prioritizes geopolitical convenience over justice.”
The pan-Igbo activists cited Kanu’s British citizenship and the fact that his broadcasts from London are protected by UK free speech laws (Human Rights Act 1998; Article 10 ECHR) as reasons why the conviction is significant to the UK.
The statement stated that IPOB is lawfully registered in the UK under company number 09862831 and that “his political advocacy is peaceful, legal, and constitutionally protected in the UK.”
Human rights duties cannot be subordinated to UK economic interests. Trade amounts of £6.5 billion a year with Nigeria do not release Britain from its obligation to defend a citizen who is being persecuted by the state. The UK’s reputation around the world is at risk. The statement went on, “Silence here undermines UK moral authority in future human-rights cases.”
The Nigerian government’s refusal to abide by a legally binding Court of Appeal ruling, Kanu’s illegal rendition and purported trial under a repealed law, and claims of falsified evidence in the ruling were all major concerns that the activists demanded the UK immediately acknowledge in a public statement.
Additionally, they requested that the UK urge that the Nigerian government abide with the 2022 Court of Appeal ruling that cleared Kanu and offer the IPOB leader complete consular support, including access to medical care and oversight of the incarceration circumstances.
A parliamentary investigation into the UK government’s handling of Kanu’s rendition and continued detention, as well as a review of potential sanctions under the UK Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations (Magnitsky model) against officials implicated in the rendition, torture, suppression of court rulings, and fabrication of evidence, are other demands.
“We disagree with the claim that this is an internal Nigerian issue. It becomes an international issue and a test of UK values when a British citizen is kidnapped overseas, tortured, tried under a statute that has been repealed, denied the benefit of a binding appellate acquittal, and found guilty based on false accusations.
“It is quite concerning that the United Kingdom, the guardian of Magna Carta and the originator of contemporary human rights law, has remained silent. It conveys the perilous idea that fair trial standards are malleable based on the parties involved and that realpolitik can supersede the rights of its own citizens. We will not tolerate this injustice. Complicity is silence.
“The UK needs to take action,” the statement continued.
