Maduabuchi Idam, an activist attorney, has denounced what he called “selective injustice” against IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu and other Biafra agitators.
Idam was responding to the president’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 ones that directly affected him, such as Kanu’s trial.
“The protest was a massive success,” says a statement signed by Idam. Across ethnic boundaries, there has been a unified outcry against the selective injustice meted out to Mr. Nnamdi Kanu and all of the Biafra agitators.
“Well-meaning Nigerians from many ethnic origins have publicly identified with Mr. Kanu and his battle for the first time in the Biafra agitation’s history.
“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 declaration that Kanu’s counsel should be sanctioned for subjudice. As a result, he has the constitutional right to voice his opinions on any national problem, including ones that directly touch him, like Mr. Nnamdi Kanu’s trial and other instances of injustice, as long as he refrains from making judgments or drawing conclusions for the court.
“It is really disheartening that a government that has little to no respect for the rule of law can quickly decide which citizens should be subject to subjudice. The state must not use its authority as a weapon to suppress 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 identifying who 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?
“Rather than further inflaming the polity, the state must act prudently and release him immediately.”
