The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday warned Aloy Ejimakor, a member of the legal team for leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, against unprofessional conduct.
The court cautioned that such behaviour could lead to his disbarment.
The trial judge, Justice James Omotosho, specifically admonished Ejimakor to refrain from spreading misinformation on social media.
The warning followed a protest letter dated May 14, and written by the prosecution’s lead counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN).
The letter, which was brought to the court’s attention by the defence’s lead counsel, Kanu Agabi (SAN), raised concerns about certain publications made by the defence team.
Awomolo confirmed writing the letter, expressing objections to the recording and live streaming of Kanu’s trial proceedings. He described the publication of the trial being put on social media as “embarrassing” and urged the court to order that all individuals entering the courtroom be required to deposit their phones outside.
He further specifically accused Ejimakor of making misleading posts about the trial on social media. “My juniors informed me that the court proceedings were being streamed online,” Awomolo said, criticising the conduct as unprofessional.
He added that Ejimakor takes to the social media platforms to make controversial posts about the trial.
In his response, Agabi stated that the defence team had apologised to the prosecution for the publications. He also apologised to the court.
Responding to the issue, Justice Omotosho reiterated his commitment to ensuring an expedited hearing in the matter, noting that this was in the interest of both parties, particularly Kanu, who has been detained for an extended period.
He recalled a similar case in 2024, where he presided over the trial of 50 suspected IPOB members, ultimately discharging and acquitting them after granting an accelerated hearing despite tactics employed by both sides to delay proceedings.
He noted that some lawyers tend to employ such tactics to delay a matter because they don’t want it to come to an end due to their personal interests.
The judge advised all counsel to avoid distractions and focus on the case, stating, “This is part of the noise in the market; it should not distract us from what we went to buy.”
Justice Omotosho warned Ejimakor about his conduct, emphasising that such behaviour could lead to disbarment.
He also cautioned against the dissemination of false news about the trial on social media, noting that some individuals were exploiting the case for online traffic.
Afterwards, the court resumed the cross-examination of the second prosecution witness, a Department of State Services operative, codenamed Mr BBB, led by Paul Erokoro, SAN, on behalf of the defence team.
During cross-examination, Erokoro asked BBB whether Radio Biafra was still broadcasting.
The witness responded that he did not know, adding that he does not listen to Radio Biafra.
When Erokoro asked him where he obtained the information he presented to the court, BBB explained that the data was provided by the department responsible for monitoring such broadcasts. He asserted that the information was reliable and “cannot be faulted.”
Erokoro inquired whether the Department of State Services could be influenced by politicians or ministers. In response, the witness stated that the DSS operates under the Office of the National Security Adviser.
He also said the Attorney General of the Federation does not direct the agency’s operations.
On the DSS’s methods of intelligence gathering, the witness revealed that the agency utilises various sources, including human intelligence and social media. He also highlighted that DSS operatives, due to their extensive training, are equipped to gather information effectively when necessary.
When asked if DSS training enables operatives to infiltrate terrorist organisations or recruit members to obtain intelligence, BBB declined to disclose specific methods, stating, “I cannot divulge the methods through which the DSS gathers intelligence.”
Erokoro also asked BBB whether Nnamdi Kanu had informed the DSS that he was kidnapped in Kenya. The witness confirmed that Kanu had made such a claim but clarified that verifying its accuracy was not part of his duties.
He further asserted that the DSS does not have the authority to conduct arrests outside Nigeria’s borders When asked if DSS officers were involved in Kanu’s alleged abduction in Kenya, BBB responded, “I don’t know, but I’m sure it is not our officers because we are an internal security agency, and we don’t operate outside the shores of Nigeria.
Under continued cross-examination, the prosecution’s witness testified that he had heard Nnamdi Kanu claim that soldiers attacked his home, resulting in the deaths of 28 people.
BBB, however, reiterated that Kanu, through his Radio Biafra broadcasts, incited violence, including during the #EndSARS protests. He added that Kanu expressed his determination to achieve Biafra “by all means, including war.”
The witness alleged that Kanu’s inciting comments led to the burning of a police station in Ebonyi State, a Lagos State High Court, and the cargo shed at Murtala Muhammed Airport in Lagos.
BBB also detailed some of the casualties allegedly linked to Kanu’s broadcasts, including an army couple who were killed and beheaded in Orlu by individuals believed to be members of the Eastern Security Network, the armed wing of IPOB. He also mentioned the murder of retired judge Stephen Nnaji.
Meanwhile, Erokoro tendered certified true copies of judgments from three fundamental rights enforcement lawsuits filed by Kanu. These included: A judgment from the Abia State High Court dated January 19, 2022. A judgment from the Federal High Court, Umuahia Division, delivered on October 26, 2022, and a judgment from the High Court of Enugu State, delivered on October 26, 2023.
The court admitted the documents as evidence.
In the judgment delivered by the Abia State High Court, Justice Benson Anya ordered the Nigerian government to pay Kanu N1 billion in damages for the Nigerian Army’s unlawful invasion of his residence in 2017.
Justice Anya held that the military invasion of Kanu’s home in September 2017 was illegal, unlawful, and unconstitutional, violating his fundamental rights to life, dignity, liberty, and fair hearing, as guaranteed under the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Afterwards, Erokoro sought an adjournment, informing the court that the defence intended to tender a video clip as evidence but needed more time to prepare it for presentation.
Justice Omotosho granted the request and adjourned the case until Thursday, May 22, for the continuation of the cross-examination of witness BBB.
STAY WITH 9NEWS NIGERIA. YOUR NUMBER 1 FAVOURITE NEWS SOURCE.
