Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, special counsel to Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader Nnamdi Kanu, has accused Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja of improperly rushing to convict and sentence Kanu after a heated courtroom confrontation in which the defendant accused the judge of bias.
In a statement issued on Friday, October 23, 2026, Ejimakor said the judge should have adjourned proceedings once Kanu, who was representing himself, openly alleged bias, rather than proceeding immediately to judgment in a case that carried the possibility of a capital sentence.
On November 20, 2025, during the trial, Kanu told the judge: “My Lord, you are biased, this is not law, you don’t know what you are doing.” Security operatives then forcibly removed him from the courtroom. Justice Omotosho ordered that judgment proceed in Kanu’s absence, citing his unruly conduct. The court convicted Kanu on all seven counts of the terrorism charge, imposing life imprisonment on four counts, 20 years on one count and five years on another, with the sentences to run concurrently.
Ejimakor argued that the sequence created a serious fair-hearing and apparent-bias issue that could expose the conviction to challenge on appeal. Where a self-represented defendant in a capital case repeatedly accuses the judge of bias during a heated confrontation, he said, the proper course is to suspend proceedings and allow tempers to cool “not rush the conviction of the defendant on the same day, at the same proceedings.”
He noted that Nigerian courts apply an objective test: whether a reasonable and fair-minded person, knowing the relevant facts, would conclude there is a real possibility the judge could not remain impartial. Even if a judge believes he is impartial, Ejimakor said, the appearance of partiality can still raise a legal issue. A heated personal confrontation in open court between the judge and an unrepresented defendant “can itself generate the appearance of hostility or partiality in the eyes of a reasonable observer and appellate courts.”
Kanu had dismissed his legal team in October 2025 after a defence led by former Attorney-General of the Federation Kanu Agabi (SAN) withdrew. He then declined repeated opportunities to open his defence and was deemed to have waived that right. Ejimakor has previously argued that the right to legal representation in capital cases is a mandatory constitutional safeguard that cannot simply be waived.
While accepting that trial courts have inherent powers to remove a disruptive defendant, Ejimakor maintained that expulsion did not resolve the larger problem. Proceeding directly to judgment while a bias allegation remained unresolved, he said, created an avoidable appellate vulnerability and a high risk that an appellate court could find a breach of fair hearing, an appearance of bias or a procedural irregularity sufficient to set aside the conviction.
Justice Omotosho stated during sentencing that he could have imposed the death penalty but chose life imprisonment on the basis of mercy and his Christian beliefs. Ejimakor pointed out that similar objective standards for apprehended bias apply in other common-law jurisdictions, including England, Canada and Australia, and that judicial ethics in the United States emphasise both actual and apparent impartiality, particularly in high-stakes cases.
He recommended that after such a confrontation the court should restore order, adjourn, address any bias allegation formally and give the defendant a fair opportunity to state grounds. An adjournment, he said, would have strengthened rather than undermined the legitimacy of the proceedings.
Kanu’s conviction remains subject to appeal. His legal team continues to challenge the judgment on jurisdictional and fair-hearing grounds.
A story of courage, wonder, and the transformative power of self-belief; perfect for readers aged 10+ who love adventure. To place order: +234 806 130 3237 | +234 803 582 0870 OR Tap the link to grab a copy:https://www.zeekapublish.com/product/the-magical-life-of-anna
