A resolution calling on the Nigerian government to uphold constitutional and international human rights standards in its handling of legal proceedings involving the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has been introduced in the United States House of Representatives.
The measure, H.Res. 1321, titled “Calling on the Government of Nigeria to ensure that all legal proceedings involving Mazi Nnamdi Kanu are conducted in full accordance with Nigeria’s constitutional obligations and international human rights commitments,” was introduced on May 22, 2026, by Representative John James and was sighted on Tuesday.
The resolution raises concerns about the circumstances surrounding Kanu’s arrest in Nairobi, Kenya, in June 2021 and his subsequent transfer to Nigeria.
It also cites a July 20, 2022 opinion by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which found that Kanu’s detention violated international human rights obligations and called for his release as well as appropriate remedies.
According to the resolution, concerns have also been raised by legal observers, Kenyan courts and human rights organisations regarding due process, access to legal representation and the conditions of Kanu’s detention.
The measure further notes that prolonged detention without adequate medical care poses humanitarian concerns and underscores the importance of protecting freedom of expression, fair trial rights and the humane treatment of detainees under international law.
The resolution states in part: “Whereas Nnamdi Kanu is a political figure known for advocating on behalf of communities in southeastern Nigeria;
Whereas Nnamdi Kanu has publicly expressed his views regarding political self-determination and governance through speech and advocacy;
Whereas concerns have been raised by human rights organizations regarding due process, access to counsel, and conditions of detention;
Whereas prolonged detention without adequate medical care raises serious humanitarian concerns;
Whereas the protection of freedom of expression, fair trial rights, and humane treatment of detainees are fundamental principles recognized under international law, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;
Whereas the United States has a longstanding commitment to advocating for the protection of human rights and the rule of law globally.”
The resolution comes months after Kanu was convicted on terrorism-related charges and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Following a trial that stemmed from his rendition from Kenya in June 2021, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja convicted the IPOB leader on seven counts on November 20, 2025. While prosecutors sought the death penalty, the court imposed a life sentence.
Kanu subsequently filed a notice of appeal before the Court of Appeal on February 4, 2026, challenging the conviction on multiple grounds and seeking to have both the judgment and sentence overturned.
The proposed resolution urges the US House of Representatives to:
- Call on the Nigerian government to ensure that all legal proceedings involving Kanu are conducted in line with Nigeria’s constitutional obligations and international human rights commitments;
- Encourage Nigerian authorities to consider the findings of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and take appropriate action consistent with those findings;
- Ensure Kanu has regular access to legal counsel, necessary medical care and humane conditions of detention;
- Encourage the U.S. Secretary of State to engage with the Nigerian government on concerns relating to due process, detention conditions and fundamental rights; and
- Reaffirm the United States’ commitment to human rights, freedom of expression and the rule of law worldwide.
As of June 2, 2026, the resolution remained at the introductory stage, had no listed co-sponsors and had not been scheduled for further legislative action.
If adopted, the measure would express the sense of the U.S. House of Representatives but would not be legally binding on the Nigerian government.
