Those Attacking Nnamdi Kanu’s Lead Counsel Alloy Ejimakor Lack Knowledge Of Law
By Invitation.
Written By Ifeanyi Chijioke
After the latest court appearance of Nnamdi Kanu, and the subsequent ruling of the court that denied him bail, some IPOB members decided to wrongly descend on Nnamdi Kanu’s lead counsel, Alloy Ejimakor, they argued that he failed to stick to the proper argument needed to win the case.
Conscious of the rift that exists between Alloy Ejimakor and Ifeanyi Ejiofor, its possible that the rift, by extension also exists between the supporters of Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor and Alloy Ejimakor. It is also plausible to assume that those attacking Alloy Ejimakor are the supporters of Ifeanyi Ejiofor. Well, it could be they are neutral, but pitifully lack knowledge of legal adjudication or simply put, how the law works.
While establishing their points upon which they attack Allow Ejimakor, they noted that instead of him to hinge his argument on the previous ruling of the court that granted Nnamdi Kanu bail, he founded his arguments on Nnamdi Kanu’s health condition and complications of his detention to his sound defense.
The critics of Alloy said the lead counsel only continued on the previously points of plea, and that he could not stand three Nigerian SAN that represented the prosecutors of the case.
However, in a law court, what win a case is not title or age, but argument and ability to convince a court. So, whether Nigerian government hired seventeen SAN or not, in the end, the Judge will compare and contrast the argument/submissions made by both parties and rule upon that. Nnamdi Kanu’s case is a complex case with special interest, not even hiring 200 SAN for him can get him out of detention.
There are limited grounds to plead for bail, and when a bail is given and jumped, it becomes even harder to get the second one. The Judge is not a fool, and even if he is one, he cannot be fooled twice in that manner. So, it’s important to understand that getting second bail after jumping bail is not a walk in the park.
Lets come back to the critics. In a case like Nnamdi Kanu’s, the only factor that can lead to granting a bail is health condition. Again, Alloy Ejimakor wisely brought to the attention of the trial judge that he cannot prepare his defence due to the monitoring of his client’s discussion, which includes their strategy of defence. He clearly raised sufficient health grounds upon which bail was inevitable, but the trial judge chose otherwise. The circumstance is complicated for Nnamdi Kanu, and he knows.
The critics lacked common sense when they said Alloy Ejimakor could had stopped short of insisting on the bail the trial judge granted Nnamdi Kanu in the past. These people are so daft to the point they failed to know that once Supreme Court rules or overrules a matter, lower court cannot hear or do anything about it anymore.
The court granted Nnamdi Kanu bail and the Supreme Court revoked the bail. There is practically no argument to make concerning it anymore. The Supreme Court has closed that chapter, and should Alloy Ejimakor raise the matter (of previous bail or insisting on the previous bail) it would amount to joking with the court and could be fined if care is not taken.
No lawyer, even their Ejiofor or sacked lead counsel can come to that court and argue about a matter the Supreme Court has closed. Any lawyer that does that belittles himself and would be immediately cautioned by the judge, if he insists, he would be ordered out of the court room in extreme case.
Alloy Ejimakor did his best and he offered the best any SAN could offer. Like I said before, there is special interest in Nnamdi Kanu’s case, and sometimes, such case is settled before the court even settles it.
