Maduabuchi Idam, an activist lawyer, has denounced what he called “selective injustice” against IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu and other Biafra agitators.
Idam was responding to the presidency’s declaration that Aloy Ejimakor, Kanu’s attorney, ought to be punished for subjudice because of his participation in the free Nnamdi Kanu demonstration.
He pointed out that Ejimakor maintained his constitutional right to voice his thoughts on any national topic, including issues that directly affected him, like as Kanu’s trial.
The protest was a huge success, according to a statement that Idam signed. Across ethnic divisions, there has been a unified outcry against the selective injustice meted out to Mr. Nnamdi Kanu and the whole Biafra agitators.
“Well-meaning Nigerians from different ethnic origins have publicly associated with Mr. Kanu and his cause for the first time in the history of the Biafra agitation.
“I must clarify that Mr. Ejimakor was an Igbo guy, a Nigerian, and a lawyer before to becoming Mr. Kanu’s attorney in response to the Presidency’s assertion that Kanu’s counsel should be sanctioned for sub judice. As a result, he has the constitutional right to voice his opinions on any national problem, including those that directly impact him, like Mr. Nnamdi Kanu’s trial and other injustices, as long as he refrains from making judgments or drawing conclusions for the court on matters that are still pending before it.
“It is really disheartening that a government that has little to no respect for the rule of law can quickly determine which citizens should be subject to subjudice sanctions. The government must abstain from using its authority as a weapon against free expression.
“There is no doubt that the protest has been successful and will continue to benefit the state.” However, the administration seems more interested in finding someone to punish than in taking the necessary action to address the fundamental problems brought up.
Given that Mr. Kanu’s extended incarceration cannot possibly outweigh the public interest served by his release—just as several convicts, including those on death row, have recently been released—the question that begs for an answer is: Who is actually benefiting from his continued detention?
“The state should act prudently and release him immediately instead of escalating the political unrest.”
