Former counsel to the proscribed leader of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, Aloy Ejimakor, says no number of lawyers could have altered the court’s decision convicting him of terrorism.
Ejimakor spoke on Channels Television’s The Morning Brief programme where he dismissed suggestions that stronger legal representation might have changed the verdict.
“I don’t believe one million lawyers standing behind Nnamdi Kanu would have changed the outcome of the case,” he said.
Ejimakor said he disagreed with the judgment but acknowledged the court’s authority, arguing that the evidence did not clearly link Kanu’s broadcasts to the violence in the South-East.
“The deed is done. I disagree with the conviction, the verdict, and the sentence, but the judge might have believed he had sufficient evidence. 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 said
Ejimakor compared Kanu’s trial to historic cases involving public and political figures and argued that a similar pattern surrounded Kanu’s prosecution.
‘’The people who brought Jesus before Pontius Pilate had already made up their minds. They refused to release another condemned man and insisted on crucifying Christ. Nelson Mandela was not tied to violence in South Africa, but was convicted anyway. No weapon was found. His personality was considered a threat.
Awolowo was convicted of attempting to overthrow the government, yet he was a civilian. 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.”
Recall that last Thursday, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court Abuja convicted Kanu on seven counts of terrorism and sentenced him to life imprisonment
