Table of Contents
The 'Free Nnamdi Kanu Protest,' organized by former presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), Omoyele Sowore, took place as planned on Monday throughout the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
Sowore, who had rallied numerous Nigerians from across the nation to participate in the demonstration, intended for the protesters to march to the Presidential Villa in Abuja to advocate for Kanu’s release.
However, Justice M.G. Umar issued a ruling on October 17, 2025, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2202/2025 — Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Omoyele Sowore & 4 others, prohibiting the protesters and other groups from conducting any demonstrations for Kanu’s release in specific areas within the FCT.
The ruling prohibited the respondents and any individuals or groups acting on their behalf from protesting within and around Aso Rock Villa, the National Assembly Complex, Force Headquarters, the Court of Appeal, Eagle Square, and Shehu Shagari Way.
In accordance with Justice Umar’s ruling, officers from the Nigeria Police Force blocked all roads leading to the areas specified in the ruling, effectively hindering Sowore and his fellow protesters from executing their plans.
While blocking the roads, the police also deployed teargas canisters to deter commuters and potential protesters from accessing the roads.
Despite the security forces' efforts to prevent the protesters from carrying out their agenda, Sowore and the demonstrators relocated to other areas, such as Utako and Apo in Abuja, where they continued their protest.
During the protest, the police arrested and detained Kanu’s brother, Prince Emmanuel; his Special Counsel, Aloy Ejimakor; and other protesters at the Federal Capital Territory Command CID.
According to DAILY POST, they have since been charged in court and remanded in Kuje Prison by a magistrate court.
Following the protest, a variety of reactions have emerged from Nigerians expressing differing opinions.
Protest Not in Kanu’s Interest, Rule of Law, and Counter-Productive – Ex-Arewa Forum Scribe, Anthony Sani
A former Secretary of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Anthony Sani, criticized the protest, emphasizing that it does not support the rule of law. He labeled it as counter-productive.
Sani stated to DAILY POST: “Nnamdi Kanu is facing serious charges of terrorism and secession, and since he denies the allegations, some Nigerians are skeptical about whether he has committed the offense.
“The most appropriate course of action is to allow the law to take its course, after which the government can decide what is best for the rule of law, justice, and national unity.
“Protesting for Nnamdi Kanu’s release does not align with the principles of the rule of law and is, therefore, counter-productive.”
Kanu’s Lawyers Show No Faith in Rule of Law; Forceful Release Won’t Help
Sani also insisted that Kanu’s lawyers have demonstrated a lack of faith in the rule of law by participating in the protest.
He remarked that Nigerians deserve clarity on Kanu’s guilt, asserting that a forceful release of the activist won’t clarify whether he committed the alleged offenses.
“By joining the protests, Kanu’s lawyers have not shown their confidence in the rule of law, especially considering that a forceful release of Nnamdi Kanu would not inform Nigerians about his guilt or innocence.
“Nigerians have the right to know whether Nnamdi Kanu has committed the offense he is charged with.
“I maintain that a forceful release of Nnamdi Kanu without allowing the law to proceed would be counter-productive and not in the interest of the rule of law,” he further told DAILY POST.
Protest a Massive Success – Human Rights Lawyer, Idam
Conversely, activist lawyer based in Abuja, Maduabuchi Idam, declared that the Free Nnamdi Kanu protest was a substantial success, despite police attempts to disperse the protesters.
Idam noted that for the first time in the history of Biafra agitation, prominent Nigerians from various ethnic backgrounds openly supported Kanu and his cause.
He shared with DAILY POST: “The protest was a significant success. The collective discontent against the selective injustice faced by Mr. Nnamdi Kanu and the entire Biafra movement has resonated across ethnic lines.
“For the first time in the history of Biafra agitation, well-meaning Nigerians from diverse ethnic backgrounds have openly aligned with Mr. Kanu and his struggle.”
Kanu’s Legal Team Reserves Constitutional Right to Express Their Opinion
Idam, in response to Onanuga, affirmed that Ejimakor has the right to express his views on any matter.
He stated: “Regarding the Presidency’s statement that Kanu’s counsel should face sanctions for sub judice, I must clarify that Mr. Ejimakor is an Igbo man, a Nigerian, and a lawyer before he became Mr. Kanu’s counsel.
“Thus, he is entitled to express his opinions on any national issue, including matters that affect him—such as the trial of Mr. Nnamdi Kanu and other instances of injustice—as long as he does not draw conclusions for the court or pass judgment on ongoing issues.
“It is disheartening that a government with little regard for the rule of law is quick to identify which citizens should be punished for sub judice. The state must refrain from using its powers to suppress free speech.”
Free Nnamdi Kanu Protest Will Continue to Have a Positive Impact
Idam emphasized that the protest has undoubtedly succeeded and will “continue to positively influence the state. Yet, rather than addressing the core issues raised, the government seems more focused on identifying individuals to sanction instead of taking appropriate action.
“The pressing question is: Who is genuinely benefiting from Mr. Kanu’s ongoing detention, especially considering that his prolonged incarceration cannot outweigh the public interest served by releasing him—similar to several convicts, including those on death
