Finland’s Court of Appeal has reduced the prison sentence of Biafra separatist figure Simon Ekpa from six years to four years while upholding his convictions for two terrorism-related offences.
The court delivered its judgment on Thursday, October 15, 2026, following appeals by Ekpa and prosecutors against the September 2025 ruling of the Päijät-Häme District Court.
Ekpa, 41, was convicted of participating in the activities of a terrorist group and publicly inciting people to commit crimes with terrorist intent. He has been in custody since his arrest in Finland in November 2024.
According to the appeal court, the circumstances surrounding the offences justified a reduction in the sentence, even though the judges upheld the original findings of guilt on the terrorism charges.
Court Upholds Terrorism Convictions
The prosecution had alleged that Ekpa operated from Lahti, Finland, as the supreme commander of several armed groups in southeastern Nigeria seeking to establish an independent Biafran state.
According to the prosecution’s case, members of the groups carried out attacks on police stations, government buildings and military roadblocks in pursuit of that objective.
The appeal court said it reviewed the evidence presented by prosecutors and reached the same conclusions as the district court regarding Ekpa’s activities.
Ekpa challenged the convictions, arguing that the violence in southeastern Nigeria amounted to a non-international armed conflict. He maintained that international humanitarian law, rather than Finland’s domestic terrorism legislation, should apply to his activities.
Court Examines Conflict in Southeastern Nigeria
In considering Ekpa’s argument, the judges examined the nature of the conflict, the organisation of the armed groups and the intensity of the fighting.
The court acknowledged evidence that Nigerian government forces had used heavy weapons, including armoured vehicles and combat helicopters. It also found that aspects of the armed groups’ organisation and equipment supported the argument that an internal armed conflict existed.
However, the judges concluded that the intensity and continuity of the fighting did not reach the threshold required under international case law for classification as a civil war.
The court noted that the evidence largely concerned separate attacks on police stations and road checkpoints. It found insufficient evidence that the armed groups could sustain prolonged military operations involving strategic planning and continuity of fighting.
The absence of reports of significant civilian displacement from the affected areas was another factor considered by the court.
Circumstances Lead to Reduced Sentence
Although the appeal court rejected Ekpa’s argument that the conflict removed terrorist intent from his actions, it found that the circumstances surrounding the offences resembled situations in which grounds for exemption from criminal liability, including civil war, self-defence and necessity, could be considered.
The court therefore reduced his prison sentence under Chapter 6, Section 8(1), paragraph 4 of Finland’s Criminal Code.
The reduction did not overturn his convictions for participating in a terrorist group and publicly inciting crimes with terrorist intent.
The court also noted that Ekpa had been convicted of two other offences by the district court, but those convictions were not under review in this appeal.
Appeal Ruling Not Yet Final
The case was decided by Judges Aki Rasilainen and Antti Santaranta, alongside Assistant Judge Johanna Puukka.
Finnish public broadcaster Yle reported that the appeal judgment was not yet final, leaving open the possibility of further legal proceedings subject to the applicable appeal process.
The ruling marks a change in the length of Ekpa’s prison sentence, but his two terrorism-related convictions remain upheld by the Court of Appeal.
