The legal battle surrounding Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), took a dramatic turn as his defense counsel accused Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court of a severe constitutional breach following a heated courtroom ejection.
​The controversy erupted during a recent scheduled hearing when a fiery exchange between Kanu’s legal team and the presiding judge culminated in the forceful removal of one of Kanu’s prominent defense attorneys from the courtroom.
​Speaking to reporters immediately after the incident, the defense team condemned the judge’s actions, characterizing the ejection not merely as a clash of personalities, but as a direct assault on Nigeria’s constitutional democracy.
​”What we witnessed today was a flagrant violation of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees the right to a fair hearing,” a spokesperson for the legal team stated. “By ejecting a defendant’s counsel from a courtroom during an ongoing trial, the court has effectively compromised the integrity of the defense and denied our client his right to legal representation of his choice.”
​The defense argued that the courtroom should remain a sanctuary of justice where attorneys can vigorously advocate for their clients without the fear of intimidation or arbitrary eviction. They maintained that the lawyer’s conduct did not warrant such extreme disciplinary action.
​While the court has not issued an official statement regarding the incident, sources inside the courtroom indicated that the ejection followed a series of heated arguments regarding procedural applications and the conditions of Kanu’s continued detention by the Department of State Services (DSS).
​The prosecution, meanwhile, has urged the court to maintain decorum, suggesting that the defense’s reaction is an attempt to delay proceedings and distract from the core charges of treasonable felony and terrorism leveled against the IPOB leader.
​Legal experts say this development could further complicate an already deeply polarized and high-stakes trial. Kanu’s legal team has signaled its intention to file a formal petition to the National Judicial Council (NJC) to review Justice Omotosho’s conduct, raising the possibility of a request for the judge to recuse himself from the case entirely.
​As the standoff intensifies, the case remains adjourned, with the spotlight shifting from the legal merits of the charges to the very constitutional frameworks governing the Nigerian judiciary.
