The legal team for Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), who is currently incarcerated, declared on Friday that they would not object to the possibility of a political settlement to end the protracted legal dispute between their client and the federal government.
Under the direction of Mr. Alloy Ejimakor, special counsel for Kanu, the attorneys emphasised that the trial judge is empowered under Section 17 of the Federal High Court Act to suggest reconciliation—often referred to as a “political solution”—as a means of resolving such issues.
“The provision of that section is not limited to civil matters alone. So, anyone who puts the issue on the table, will consider it. A political solution makes better sense than prosecution.
IPOB Urges FG To Free Kanu Before It’s Too Late
“However, it is for the government to put it on the table, then we will consider it. Having said that, we first have to defend him and not play politics. Right now, what is on our table is to fight for his defense.
“If they bring that option to the table and our client gives us the instruction, we will go for it,” Ejimakor told newsmen.
Kanu’s attorney expressed hope that the administration led by President Bola Tinubu would handle the situation differently than his predecessor did, citing the cases of social rights activist Omoyele Sowore and freed Yoruba nation agitator Sunday Adeyemo, also known as Sunday Igboho.
“We urge President Tinubu to carefully review this case which he inherited from the past administration and see if it was not politically motivated.
“Our client did not deserve the travail and tribulations he has been forced to endure. Sometimes, we do wonder what made his case unique. People wonder if it is because of where he hails from that made his case different,” Kanu’s counsel added.
Nnamdi Kanu’s Lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor Reveals How Native Doctors Aided Attack On My Home
Ejimakor also chastised the prosecution for failing to provide the beleaguered IPOB leader with enough time to build a strong defence against the accusation.
He claimed that the defendant’s private discussions have been monitored by the Department of State Services, or DSS, or that the defendant has been denied access to his attorneys.
“We have concerns about the privacy of our conversations. There was a day I was speaking with my client, in the company of a colleague, and they took secret photographs of us. We were surprised when they later mistakenly filed that photo in court.
Follow us on Facebook
Post Disclaimer
The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the author and forum participants on this website do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of Anaedo Online or official policies of the Anaedo Online.