Simon Ekpa, the self-proclaimed Prime Minister of the Biafran Republic Government in Exile (BRGIE), made the news headlines in Nigeria on Thursday, 15  October, after an appeal court in Finland delivered its judgment in the terrorism case he is facing.

BRGIE is an autopilot faction of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) which began to function shortly after the arrest of the IPOB leader,  Nnamdi Kanu, and the subsequent split of the group.

BRGIE and its armed wing, the Biafran Liberation Army and Biafran Defence Forces, have, in recent years, been linked to deadly attacks on security formations, government facilities and even residents in Nigeria’s South-East over the last six years.

Ekpa was arrested in November 2024 in Finland by Finnish police for using his social media page to coordinate attacks in Nigeria’s South-east region and claimed responsibility for attacks at that time.

In May 2025, he was charged with public incitement to commit a crime with terrorist intent and participation in a terrorist group.

The prosecutor had said the charges were linked to Ekpa’s secessionist activities in “Biafra land.”

In his first appearance in court on 30 May 2025, the Biafra agitator denied the terrorism charges. 

The Päijät-Häme District Court in Finland, last year, later sentenced Mr Ekpa to six years in prison after finding him guilty of terrorism-related charges.

But Ekpa appealed the judgment to a higher court.

‘He is free’ claim

The news of the Appeal Court judgment was first spread online, particularly on the X platform by his followers, who claimed that “he is now a free man.”

One of his followers and the self-proclaimed Acting Prime Minister of BRGIE, Ngọzi Orabueze, was among the first people to make the claim(archived here) that the judgment means that Ekpa is free.

Other followers also made the claim here, here and here.

Is the claim true?

Ruling on Thursday, the appeal court upheld the decision by Päijät-Häme District Court which found the Biafra agitator guilty of terrorism.

The appeal court, however, reduced the six-year jail term imposed on the convict to four years, Yle, a Finnish newspaper, reported.

Another Finnish online newspaper, Helsinki Times, reported that the court found Ekpa participated in activities of a terrorist group and publicly incited criminal acts for terrorist purposes.

Ekpa’s six-year jail term was reduced after the court examined the circumstances surrounding the conflict in south-east Nigeria linked to his charges.

During his appeal,  Ekpa argued that south-eastern Nigeria was experiencing an internal armed conflict and that international humanitarian law, rather than Finnish terrorism legislation, should govern his actions, Helsinki Times reported.

The Biafra agitator submitted evidence concerning the organisation of armed groups, their weapons and the Nigerian government’s military operations.

The appeal court examined whether the fighting met the legal threshold for an internal armed conflict, drawing comparisons with international tribunal assessments of the Balkan Wars.

The trial judges acknowledged that the weapons and equipment used by Nigerian government forces and the armed groups under  Ekpa’s command indicated conditions resembling an internal armed conflict.

However, the judges concluded that “the intensity and frequency” of the fighting did not meet the threshold required under international case law.

The court found that attacks occurred intermittently and primarily targeted police stations and road checkpoints.

It also found insufficient evidence that Ekpa’s forces possessed the operational capacity to sustain prolonged military campaigns.

The newspaper reported that the absence of reports documenting substantial civilian displacement from the affected areas further weakened the argument that the conflict amounted to a civil war.

Despite rejecting  Ekpa’s central defence, the court found that the circumstances surrounding his offences resembled those in civil war, self-defence, and necessity.

The court found those circumstances sufficient to justify reducing the jail term while upholding the lower court’s terrorism convictions.

The newspaper reported that the latest judgement is not yet final.

Ekpa and the prosecution can seek permission to appeal to Finland’s Supreme Court.