From Finland to Abuja: The Tale of Three Men and the Global Reach of Incitement
In a compelling show of international justice, three men, all of Nigerian descent yet operating from abroad, have been jailed for incitement and terror-related offenses. Their cases — spanning Finland, the UK, and Nigeria itself — underscore how digital platforms can serve as tools of division, and how nations are increasingly willing to prosecute cross-border provocateurs. This narrative also raises pressing questions about equality before the law and the limits of incitement when sovereignty and self-determination are involved.
1. Simon Ekpa – Finland’s Conviction Signals Transnational Accountability
Simon Ekpa, a Finnish citizen and high-profile Biafran separatist, was recently sentenced to six years in prison by a Finnish court. The Päijät-Häme District Court found him guilty on multiple counts, including participation in a terrorist organization, public incitement to commit crimes for terrorist purposes, and aggravated tax fraud.
Court documents revealed that between August 2021 and November 2024, Ekpa used his substantial social media following (especially on X, formerly Twitter) to call for violence against Nigerian security forces. More alarmingly, prosecutors said he “equipped the groups with weapons, explosives and ammunition” via his network.
Finland’s actions drew praise from Nigeria. According to ThisDayLive, “a major victory for the Nigerian people in the collective fight against terror,” declared by the Minister of Information, while the Nigerian Bar Association and other civil society groups urged domestic institutions to follow Finland’s lead.
2. Adeyinka “Grandson” Shoyemi – The UK Jails a Hate Speech Instigator
In another high-profile case, Adeyinka Shoyemi, better known by his alias Adeyinka Grandson, was sentenced to 4.5 years in a UK prison for inciting racial hatred against the Igbo people in Nigeria.
His conviction came after a lengthy investigation by the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit (CTIRU), which traced a series of inflammatory social media posts to him. During his trial at the Southwark Crown Court, he was found guilty on eight counts of incitement.
According to reports, Grandson had used social media to promote violence, issuing what was described as “quit notices” to Igbos in Yorubaland, demanding they leave or face dire consequences. His conviction underscores how national hate speech laws can reach beyond borders, especially when digital platforms are used to incite ethnic violence in another country.
3. Nnamdi Kanu – A Protracted Battle Ends in Life Imprisonment
At the heart of the controversy is Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), who was sentenced to life imprisonment by a Nigerian court on November 20, 2025. Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court convicted him on multiple charges: terrorism, incitement, membership of a proscribed organization, and threats against international diplomatic missions.
The judge was particularly critical of Kanu’s broadcasts, which urged supporters to ambush security forces, seize weapons, and conduct violent attacks. The court also found that his “sit-at-home” orders in Southeastern Nigeria — weekly economic shutdowns he decreed — amounted to a form of terror.
While prosecutors had called for the death penalty, Justice Omotosho exercised what he described as “mercy” in sentencing him to life. Still, the court ordered that he be held in protective custody and restricted from accessing digital devices — a move intended to limit his capacity to continue broadcasting.
Predictably, Kanu’s legal team has vowed to appeal. They argue the verdict lacked a sound legal basis, calling it a “travesty of justice.”
Why These Three Cases Matter
What links these men is not merely their Nigerian heritage, but the use of communication — especially social media or broadcasts — to stoke division, encourage violence, or fund separatist movements. But there are stark contrasts in how swiftly justice was delivered, and where.
1. Speed and Jurisdiction:
Ekpa (Finland): Arrested in 2024, sentenced in 2025.
Grandson (UK): Investigation began as early as 2019; convicted in 2022.
Kanu (Nigeria): His legal saga spans a decade (first arrested in 2015) and has endured multiple delays and controversies.
2. Severity of Crimes:
Ekpa’s offense included providing weapons.
Grandson’s acts were primarily online hate speech (though taken seriously as terroristic under UK law).
Kanu’s conviction included mass incitement, death threats, and infrastructure destruction.
3. International Implications:
Finland’s judgment against Ekpa is being celebrated in Nigeria as a model.
The UK’s prosecution of Grandson shows how diaspora advocacy can be policed if it crosses into criminal territory.
Kanu’s conviction and imprisonment bring home how Nigeria is responding to internal separatist agitation — but also raises concern among his supporters who see him as a political prisoner.
Reflection: Equity, Incitement, and the Rule of Law
The juxtaposition of these three cases fuels difficult but necessary reflection:
Double Standards or Equal Justice?
Why was Ekpa, operating from Finland, convicted so much faster than Kanu has been in Nigeria? Is it purely a matter of foreign jurisdictions being more efficient, or does political risk play a part?
The Power (and Danger) of Technology:
All three men used media — be it social platforms or radio — to communicate. The trials show that what happens online can have real-world, even lethal, consequences. But it also raises the stakes on how the law interprets speech, particularly secessionist or separatist rhetoric.
Self-Determination vs Terrorism:
Kanu and Ekpa (both associated with the Biafra movement) have framed their actions as part of a struggle for self-determination. But courts in two countries have now determined that their methods crossed legal lines and constituted terrorism. This challenges the argument that all secessionist activism is purely political.
Rule of Law vs Populist Sympathy:
Among Kanu’s supporters, there’s a belief that he cannot be convicted because of his identity and cause. But the court has made a definitive legal ruling. The message: even figureheads of self-determination are not above the law — at least in this instance.
Conclusion
These three cases — Ekpa in Finland, Grandson in the UK, and Kanu in Nigeria — form a powerful narrative about modern incitement, cross-border activism, and the reach of justice. While their motives may vary, the law has held each of them accountable, proving that incitement is not a crime confined to national borders.
To those who might be tempted to emulate them: inciting violence — even from halfway around the world — carries real consequences. The world, it seems, is increasingly united in saying: no safe haven for speech that breeds terror.
0 Comments