Follow Us on Google
Counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has insisted that he voluntarily withdrew from representing the detained IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, in December 2023, maintaining that reports suggesting he was only recently dismissed distort the facts.
Ejiofor made the clarification in a statement titled, “Setting the Record Straight: I Personally Withdrew from Nnamdi Kanu’s Legal Representation in December 2023,” following the circulation of a letter purportedly written by Kanu from the Sokoto Correctional Centre, announcing the termination of his services.
According to the senior lawyer, he had ceased acting for Kanu in every capacity long before the IPOB leader’s conviction and life sentence, stressing that he has not represented him personally, his family or any of his private interests since December 2023.
“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 any capacity since December 2023, long before his eventual conviction and the subsequent sentence to life imprisonment,” Ejiofor said.
He shared that while he ended his personal legal relationship with Kanu, his law firm remained under a separate and continuous mandate as solicitors to IPOB.
Ejiofor said the firm had continued to represent the organisation professionally, securing the discharge and acquittal of more than 200 alleged IPOB members after full trials at the Federal High Court in Abuja and the High Courts of Ebonyi and Abia states between December 2023 and 2025.
“These are not matters founded on hearsay or conjecture. The records are matters of public knowledge and are readily verifiable,” he stated.
The lawyer further clarified that Kanu never independently appointed him as counsel to IPOB, noting that his earlier relationship with the IPOB leader was limited to serving as his personal lawyer before he voluntarily withdrew.
“From December 2023 to date, I have not represented Nnamdi Kanu in any capacity whatsoever, whether as his private counsel, family lawyer, or otherwise.
“Any attempt to suggest the contrary is, at best, a deliberate distortion of the facts and, at worst, a calculated narrative designed to serve ulterior and mischievous purposes,” he said.
Ejiofor also disclosed that IPOB had reaffirmed his position as one of its solicitors, arguing that the organisation’s legal mandate was independent of Kanu’s previous role as its leader.
“IPOB, as an organisation, has today reaffirmed our standing as its solicitors and legal representatives.
“That professional relationship is founded upon a continuing mandate and cannot be retrospectively altered, invalidated, or otherwise dictated by its former leaders,” he added.
Questioning the authenticity of the purported dismissal letter, Ejiofor pointed to provisions of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act governing communications from inmates.
According to him, any correspondence originating from a convicted inmate or detainee must bear the authentication of the officer in charge of the correctional facility before it can be regarded as official.
“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,” he stated.
He urged journalists and members of the public to verify such communications before publishing or relying on them, warning against amplifying unauthorised documents without following the legal procedures governing inmate correspondence.
Concluding the statement, Ejiofor maintained that the facts surrounding his legal mandate were already in the public domain and urged those interested in the matter to rely on verifiable records rather than “manufacture narratives for purposes best known to them.”
