A Federal High Court judge has strongly criticized the use of social media by Aloy Ejimakor, a member of Nnamdi Kanu’s legal team, during the ongoing trial of the Biafra separatist leader. The rebuke came as the Federal Government, through its counsel Chief Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), formally opposed a request by Kanu’s family for live streaming of the courtroom proceedings.
At Wednesday’s resumed hearing, Kanu’s lead counsel, Kanu Agabi (SAN), brought to the court’s attention a letter from Awomolo dated May 14, 2025, recommending a ban on the use of mobile phones in the courtroom. Awomolo accused Ejimakor of posting misleading and embarrassing commentary about the trial on social media, including video posts on Facebook calling on “Biafrans” to rise against Kanu’s prosecution.
Agabi, while addressing the court, condemned Ejimakor’s actions and offered a public apology, promising such conduct would not happen again. Justice James Omotosho, presiding over the case, expressed strong displeasure at what he described as unprofessional conduct among Kanu’s legal team. He warned that such behavior could lead to disciplinary action, including possible disbarment, and described Ejimakor and others as “content creators” who appeared to be prolonging the trial for personal gain.
Justice Omotosho urged all parties, especially those prosecuting the trial on social media, to act professionally and refrain from misconduct. He noted that he had granted accelerated hearing in the interest of all parties, particularly Nnamdi Kanu, who has been in custody for an extended period.
The trial continued with the cross-examination of a Department of State Services (DSS) operative, codenamed BBB, by defense counsel Paul Erokoro (SAN). The DSS witness clarified that the agency operates under the Office of the National Security Adviser and is not influenced by politicians or the Attorney General. The witness also explained that DSS intelligence gathering relies on multiple sources, including human intelligence and social media.
The court proceedings highlighted the tension between legal protocol and the use of social media in high-profile cases, as well as the government’s determination to keep the trial proceedings out of the public broadcast domain.