Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has finally broken his silence, stating that he personally withdrew from the legal representation of Nnamdi Kanu in December 2023.
Ejiofor explained that Nnamdi Kanu never independently appointed him and his legal team as solicitors to IPOB. According to him, his limited role in their appointment arose solely from his position as Kanu’s personal lawyer, a role from which he formally disengaged in December 2023.
His clarification followed the circulation of a purported letter allegedly issued by Nnamdi Kanu, claiming to have sacked Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor as IPOB’s lawyer.
Ejiofor stated that his last court appearance for Kanu was in December 2023, after which he completely withdrew from representing him.
Ejiofor made this known in a statement issued on Tuesday titled:
“SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: I PERSONALLY WITHDREW FROM NNAMDI KANU’S LEGAL REPRESENTATION IN DECEMBER 2023: NO ROOM FOR MISCHIEF: THE FACTS CONCERNING MY LEGAL MANDATE FROM IPOB.”
He further stated that, for the avoidance of doubt, he has not represented Nnamdi Kanu in any capacity whatsoever since December 2023, whether as his personal counsel, family lawyer, or in any other professional capacity.
According to Ejiofor, any attempt to suggest otherwise is, at best, a deliberate distortion of the facts and, at worst, a calculated narrative designed to serve ulterior and mischievous purposes.
“For the avoidance of doubt, and for the sake of clarity, I wish to state unequivocally that I personally disengaged myself from the legal representation of Nnamdi Kanu in every capacity since December 2023, long before his eventual conviction and the subsequent sentence to life imprisonment,” he said.
Ejiofor further explained that, in the exercise of their professional rights and responsibilities as legal practitioners, he and his team have remained under a valid and continuous retainer as solicitors to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) throughout the relevant period.
He said that in that capacity, they have diligently and professionally discharged their responsibilities by securing the discharge and acquittal, after full trials, of more than 200 alleged IPOB members at the Federal High Court in Abuja, the High Court of Ebonyi State, and the High Court of Abia State between December 2023 and 2025.
He stressed that he withdrew from representing Kanu in every capacity long before Kanu’s eventual conviction and subsequent sentence of life imprisonment.
- Advertisement -
According to Ejiofor, these are not matters founded on hearsay or conjecture, as the records are publicly available and can readily be verified.
He also stated that it is important to place on record that IPOB has reaffirmed his firm and his team’s standing as the organization’s solicitors and legal representatives.
According to him, that professional relationship is based on a continuing legal mandate and cannot be retrospectively altered, invalidated, or dictated by any former leaders of the organization.
Ejiofor further emphasized the legal requirements governing communications purportedly issued by inmates.
“It is important to state, at this juncture, that the Nigerian Correctional Service Act is clear as to the manner in which any communication purportedly emanating from a convict or an inmate may be duly authenticated or validated. Any communication purportedly emanating from an inmate, whether a convicted prisoner or a person awaiting trial, must bear the imprimatur and appropriate authentication of the officer in charge of the relevant correctional centre. This requirement is intended to ensure the authenticity, integrity, and proper verification of such communication.
“This clarification is particularly important and should serve as a cautionary reminder to practitioners who are often quick to report what are clearly unauthorised communications purportedly emanating from inmates without first appreciating or verifying the applicable legal and administrative procedures governing such communications.
“Let the facts, therefore, speak for themselves. Let the records speak for themselves. And let those who are genuinely interested in the truth consult the records rather than manufacture narratives for purposes best known to them.
“We continue moving forward.”
