The family of jailed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has again criticised the British government for what it described as a failure to intervene adequately in his case.
Kanu, who is serving a life sentence in Sokoto following his conviction on terrorism charges brought by the Nigerian government, holds both Nigerian and British citizenship.
The Okwu-Kanu family, through Prince Emmanuel Kanu, on Sunday urged British authorities to intervene over the reported failure of the Nigerian Court of Appeal to list Kanu’s appeal against his conviction for hearing.
The family said the appeal had remained unlisted several months after it was filed. It also alleged that the Nigerian government had yet to file a response, prompting claims by the family and IPOB that the prosecution was avoiding the court.
IPOB has also threatened to boycott the 2027 elections in the South-East over the alleged failure to hear the appeal.
Speaking on Sunday, the family accused Britain of failing to provide adequate consular protection for Kanu as a British citizen.
According to the family, the British government’s intervention had been limited to telephone calls lasting about 10 minutes every three to four months, which it described as insufficient.
“A ten-minute call every three to four months asking about food and health, as the family describes its experience, is not an adequate response to a case involving a life sentence, a disputed legal foundation and an appeal that remains unheard. It is a welfare check, not a solution,” the family said.
The family also referred to the United Kingdom’s appointment of Alistair Burt in July 2026 as its first Envoy for Complex Consular Detentions, a role intended to give additional attention to difficult cases involving British nationals detained overseas.
It called on the British government to clarify whether Kanu’s case had been referred to the envoy and, if not, explain why.
“Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s circumstances warrant a direct answer on whether his case has been referred to the Envoy and, if not, why not,” the family said.
It added that Kanu’s appeal was filed and served in June 2026 but, according to the family, remained unlisted and unheard, with no respondent’s brief filed.
The family further said the Supreme Court process initiated by Kanu in November 2025 had yet to produce the substantive response it was seeking. It also claimed that letters addressed to the Chief Justice of Nigeria and the President of the Court of Appeal had not yielded a satisfactory resolution.
The family said every additional month without meaningful progress deepened its concerns about what it described as a failure of the justice system in a case involving Kanu’s continued detention.
“Britain must not hide behind the formalities of consular contact while the substance of the case remains unresolved,” the family said.
According to Prince Emmanuel Kanu, although Britain had engaged diplomatically over the case, it had yet to secure a hearing of the appeal or a meaningful remedy for the alleged violations during the trial.
The family also criticised Britain’s historical opposition to the Biafran independence movement during the Nigerian Civil War, alleging that the country’s past position had influenced its handling of Kanu’s case.
“Britain’s historical hostility towards Biafra has been transferred to Mazi Nnamdi Kanu,” the family said.
Among its demands, the Okwu-Kanu family urged the British government to formally ask Nigerian authorities to identify the specific, current provisions of written law under which Kanu was convicted and detained, citing Section 36(12) of the Nigerian Constitution.
The family also questioned Britain’s response to the continued delay in hearing Kanu’s appeal.
“Does Britain consider the continued failure to list and hear Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s appeal, in the circumstances described, a serious due-process concern? What specific representations has it made to secure a prompt hearing?” the family asked.
It further asked whether Kanu’s case had been referred to the envoy appointed in July 2026 and whether the British Foreign Secretary would ensure that it received urgent, senior-level attention.
The family also sought clarification on the representations Britain had made concerning Kanu’s continued detention and subsequent prosecution, particularly in view of its claim that the Court of Appeal had previously discharged him and quashed some counts against him.
It called on the British government to outline concrete steps and a timetable for pursuing a hearing of the appeal and addressing the issues affecting its citizen.
The Okwu-Kanu family maintained that Britain must move beyond routine diplomatic engagement and take more concrete steps in the case.
“Britain presents itself as a defender of the rule of law and the common-law tradition. It has acknowledged Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s case and claims to have previously raised it with Nigerian authorities. Yet diplomatic engagement has not secured a hearing of his appeal or a meaningful remedy for the matters the family has raised.
“The family therefore asks Britain to move beyond routine engagement. Diplomatic contact is not the same as effective protection. A record of meetings is not proof that justice has been secured. Britain’s duty to its citizen must be measured by the seriousness of its actions and the results it seeks—not by the number of times officials say they have raised his case,” the family said.
'10-minute phone call every 3 months not enough' - Nnamdi Kanu's family to British Govt