Ejiofor, IPOB Clash Over Legal Representation Claim

A public dispute has broken out between Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader Nnamdi Kanu and his longtime lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, over who has legal authority to represent the group.

The disagreement began on July 22, when Kanu, writing from the Sokoto Correctional Centre, formally terminated Ejiofor’s services as his personal lawyer and withdrew any authority previously granted to him to represent IPOB, his family, or the movement.

Kanu told Ejiofor he had no authority to act or speak on his behalf from the date of the letter, grounding his decision in the movement’s Code of Conduct, and separately warned him against disclosing confidential information from their years of legal representation.

Ejiofor Says He Withdrew From Kanu’s Case in 2023

Ejiofor broke his silence in a Facebook statement titled “Setting the Record Straight,” insisting he had voluntarily withdrawn from representing Kanu personally as far back as December 2023, long before Kanu’s conviction and life sentence.

“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 said his law firm, however, kept a separate and ongoing mandate as solicitors to IPOB itself, and that the firm had secured the discharge and acquittal of more than 200 alleged IPOB members in courts across Abuja, Ebonyi and Abia states between December 2023 and 2025.

Ejiofor also questioned the authenticity of Kanu’s sack letter, citing provisions of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act that require inmate communications to carry authentication from the officer in charge of the correctional facility.

He said IPOB had separately reaffirmed his standing as its solicitor, arguing that mandate could not be altered by what he called the group’s “former leadership figures.”

IPOB Rejects Reinstatement Claim as ‘Dead on Arrival’

IPOB, however, rejected Ejiofor’s claim of reaffirmation. Spokesperson Emma Powerful dismissed the letter Ejiofor relied on as “a worthless piece of paper,” describing it as “not only unethical” but “dead on arrival.”

The group said the letter was signed by Chika Edoziem, a former member it says has since been expelled, arguing that expelled individuals cannot confer legal authority on IPOB’s behalf.

IPOB maintained that under its Code of Conduct, only Kanu, as the group’s Supreme Leader, holds sole authority to appoint or dismiss its legal representatives.

The group went further, blaming Ejiofor’s handling of the case for Kanu’s continued detention, alleging he failed to file a preliminary objection against a stay of execution it says was improperly issued.

It also accused him of returning to court alone after Kanu boycotted a hearing, and of later visiting the Department of State Services to persuade Kanu to resume attending proceedings, actions IPOB described as “sabotage and compromise, which is precisely why he was sacked.”

The group rejected Ejiofor’s claim that Kanu’s original sack letter lacked proper authentication, saying it had been notarised by a lawyer in Sokoto.

IPOB said Ejiofor remains free to represent other clients but not the movement, warning that any arrangement he may have reached with the Nigerian government to divide IPOB’s leadership would not be recognised.

The group said it stands united behind Kanu and signalled it is prepared to contest the matter in court if necessary.