Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to President Bola Tinubu on Information and Strategy, has strongly criticised Aloy Ejimakor, one of the lawyers representing Nnamdi Kanu, over his participation in the recent #FreeNnamdiKanuNow protest in Abuja. In a statement shared on his X account, Onanuga accused Ejimakor of undermining legal ethics and compromising the rule of law by joining street demonstrations while his client’s case is still ongoing in court. He described the lawyer’s conduct as unprofessional and capable of influencing public perception of the judicial process.
Onanuga argued that Ejimakor’s appearance at the protest, which was mobilised by activist Omoyele Sowore, amounted to a violation of legal principles. He invoked the doctrine of sub judice, which discourages public commentary or actions that could affect an active court case. According to him, rather than focusing on building a strong legal defence for his client, Ejimakor chose “extra-legal tactics” that could undermine the integrity of the legal process.
He further called on regulatory bodies such as the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) to examine Ejimakor’s conduct and consider appropriate disciplinary measures. Onanuga argued that lawyers have a duty to protect the sanctity of the courtroom, not to be seen as leading or participating in protests that might be perceived as pressuring the judiciary.
The protest in question took place on October 20, 2025, in Abuja, where demonstrators demanded the immediate release of Nnamdi Kanu, who has been in detention since 2021 on charges related to treason. The demonstration drew a large crowd and caused widespread disruption in the city. Onanuga maintained that while Nigerians have the right to peaceful protest, legal practitioners handling sensitive cases should maintain professional boundaries and allow the courts to determine outcomes.
The issue raises broader ethical and legal questions about the role of lawyers when their clients’ cases are still in court. Lawyers are expected to avoid any action that might undermine the judicial process or appear to influence public opinion about a pending case. While public advocacy can sometimes be part of a broader legal strategy, Onanuga believes such involvement blurs the line between legal defence and political activism, which could be grounds for disciplinary action.
Reactions to Onanuga’s statement have been mixed. Some supporters agree that Ejimakor’s conduct was inappropriate, while human rights groups and pro-Biafra supporters argue that the lawyer’s participation in the protest reflects a legitimate form of advocacy. They insist that public pressure and legal strategy can coexist, especially in politically sensitive cases like that of Nnamdi Kanu.
This clash highlights the tense intersection between law, politics, and activism in Nigeria. Whether or not Ejimakor faces disciplinary proceedings will depend on how the NBA and LPDC interpret his actions within the context of professional conduct. The controversy also underscores how high-profile political trials often spill beyond the courtroom, shaping public debates and testing the balance between civic rights and legal ethics.
By
