Aloy Ejimakor, former special counsel to the convicted leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has declared that no amount of legal firepower, not even “one million lawyers,” could have swayed the Federal High Court’s terrorism verdict against his client. Speaking in a defiant television appearance on Channels Television’s The Morning Brief on Monday, Ejimakor dismissed suggestions that Kanu’s self-representation or the dismissal of senior advocates undermined the defence, insisting the outcome was a foregone conclusion orchestrated by what he described as a “determined” system.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/idrinstitute.png")
“The deed is done. I disagree with the conviction, the verdict, and the sentence, but the judge might have believed he had sufficient evidence,” Ejimakor stated, acknowledging Justice James Omotosho’s authority while challenging its foundation. He argued that the prosecution failed to forge a “clear connection” between Kanu’s radio broadcasts – the crux of the seven-count charge – and the deadly violence plaguing Nigeria’s South-East. “I did not see a clear connection between the broadcasts and the violence that claimed many lives. The violence continues today. Is it still the broadcasts?” he queried, underscoring the ongoing insecurity despite Kanu’s detention.
Ejimakor drew stark historical and biblical parallels to frame Kanu’s trial as emblematic of politically motivated prosecutions. He likened it to the trial of Jesus Christ before Pontius Pilate, where accusers “had already made up their minds,” rejecting the release of another prisoner – Barabbas – in favor of crucifixion. “They refused to release another condemned man and insisted on crucifying Christ,” he said. Turning to modern icons, Ejimakor invoked Nelson Mandela’s 1964 Rivonia Trial conviction for sabotage, despite “no weapon” being found and no direct ties to violence; Mandela’s “personality was considered a threat.” He also referenced Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s 1963 conviction for treasonable felony – attempting to overthrow the government as a civilian – where “no evidence showed he had the means or opportunity.”
“So in this very case (Nnamdi Kanu), I am not saying the judge was biased, but it was palpable that the system was determined to see him convicted. It started the day he was seized in Kenya,” Ejimakor asserted, alluding to the controversial 2021 rendition operation that human rights groups have decried as an extraordinary rendition violating international law.
The remarks follow Justice Omotosho’s Thursday ruling at the Federal High Court in Abuja, where Kanu, 58, was convicted on all seven terrorism-related counts under the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act. In a detailed judgment, the court held that Kanu’s broadcasts from Radio Biafra incited attacks on security agencies, the destruction of critical infrastructure, and threats to foreign diplomatic missions. Omotosho emphasized Nigeria’s indivisibility, ruling that “self-determination cannot be pursued through violence,” and imposed a life sentence – concurrent across counts – alongside the forfeiture of Kanu’s transmitter equipment. He further directed that Kanu be remanded in a “highly secured custodial centre,” barring digital access to prevent further incitement.
Kanu’s legal team, including Ejimakor, branded the sentence “excessive” and vowed an immediate appeal to the Court of Appeal, citing procedural flaws and evidential gaps. Ejimakor confirmed Kanu’s post-verdict transfer to the remote Sokoto Custodial Centre in northwestern Nigeria, slamming the move as punitive isolation. “It separated him from his family and legal team,” he lamented, arguing it hinders appeal preparations and access to counsel.
Kanu’s legal odyssey began with his 2015 arrest on treasonable felony charges, from which he was granted bail. He fled in 2017 amid a military raid on his Afara Ukwu residence in Abia State that killed 28 people, according to IPOB. Extradited from Kenya in June 2021 under opaque circumstances including allegations of hoodwinking and illegal deportation – Kanu has remained in custody. An earlier October 2022 acquittal on terrorism charges was overturned on appeal, paving the way for the retrial.
The conviction has reignited debates over free speech, secessionist agitation, and judicial independence in Nigeria’s volatile ethnic landscape. IPOB, designated a terrorist group by the government in 2017, maintains Kanu’s activism is non-violent advocacy for Biafran self-determination. Supporters view the verdict as state repression; critics, including security analysts, credit Kanu’s rhetoric with fueling unrest that has claimed thousands of lives since 2021.
As the appeal looms with a 90-day filing window – Ejimakor’s words echo a broader cry against perceived injustice. “No number of lawyers could have altered the court’s decision,” he reiterated, positioning Kanu’s saga as a modern crucifixion in the annals of political trials.
A timely new publication, Casebook on Privacy & Data Protection in Nigeria, co-authored by Olumide Babalola and Uchenna Nnawuchi,📘Casebook on Privacy & Data Protection in Nigeria is now available on Amazon:https://a.co/d/8TmFZrd
______________________________________________________________________
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
_____________________________________________________________________
