Aloy Ejimakor, legal consultant to the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has stated that the final Nnamdi Kanu legal outcome would have remained unchanged even if one million lawyers had appeared in court to defend him.
Speaking during an interview on Channels Television, Ejimakor reflected on the prolonged legal battle surrounding Kanu’s case and explained why the verdict, in his view, was inevitable regardless of the legal team present.
Why Ejimakor Says More Lawyers Wouldn’t Change Anything
Ejimakor explained that the Nnamdi Kanu legal outcome ultimately remained the same because Kanu personally chose to take control of his defence at a point during the trial.
He noted that Kanu believed that even if his legal advisers continued leading the defence, it would not significantly alter the direction of the Nnamdi Kanu legal outcome given the nature of the case and the forces surrounding it.
Responding to questions about whether he was implying that the judicial process lacked fairness, Ejimakor clarified that he was not alleging that justice was compromised or that the judge influenced the Nnamdi Kanu legal outcome.
Instead, he said that the atmosphere and broader environment of the case made the direction of events apparent to many observers long before the final ruling.
Ejimakor Cites Historical Examples
Drawing parallels with historical legal cases, Ejimakor said certain trials throughout history appeared to have outcomes shaped by factors beyond the courtroom itself—similar, he claimed, to the Nnamdi Kanu legal outcome.
He referenced the biblical trial of Jesus Christ, where the final decision about His fate seemed predetermined despite the proceedings.
He also mentioned Nelson Mandela’s conviction during the apartheid era, noting that despite little concrete evidence, Mandela was found guilty due to the political atmosphere of the time.
Another example he gave was the conviction of Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the 1960s, which many believed was influenced by political motivations rather than legal merit.
Ejimakor Emphasizes His Stand
Ejimakor stressed again that he was not accusing the judge of bias or wrongdoing in the Nnamdi Kanu legal outcome.
He explained that his position was simply that the political and social climate surrounding the case created a palpable expectation of how the matter would conclude.
He said many Nigerians believed the Nnamdi Kanu legal outcome was driven more by external political factors than by the arguments presented by lawyers in court, which is why he insisted that even an army of lawyers could not have changed the result.