BARRISTER IFEANYI EJIOFOR’S POSITION REGARDING THE IPOD PRESCRIPTION APPEAL
The statement issued by Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, Esq. (KSC), on his social media page and other news platforms is a necessary and well-founded response to the misleading claims attempting to associate him with the outcome of the recently concluded Appeal on the proscription of IPOB. In light of these developments, it is crucial to set the record straight and reaffirm his non-involvement in the Appeal after it was taken over by a different legal team in 2022.
Barrister Ejiofor made it unequivocally clear that he had no role in the prosecution of the Appeal after it was taken over by Machukwu Ume, SAN, and Aloy Ejimakor. The decision to amend the previously filed legal processes, introduce additional grounds of Appeal, and ultimately determine the approach taken in court was entirely at the discretion of the new legal team. Ejiofor cannot and should not be held accountable for a case he did not prosecute.
Recognizing the shift in legal strategy and leadership, Barrister Ejiofor respectfully withdrew from the case and formally requested that his name not be included in any subsequent legal filings. Any claim to the contrary is not only misleading but raises serious concerns about the intent behind such assertions.
It is noteworthy that throughout the Appeal’s prosecution, Aloy Ejimakor did not attribute any aspect of the legal process to Barrister Ejiofor. However, following the dismissal of the Appeal, Ejimakor has now sought to link Ejiofor’s name to the case. This raises suspicions regarding the motive behind such actions and suggests an attempt to shift responsibility rather than provide a transparent account of the legal proceedings.
Since the legal team that took over the case made strategic decisions independent of Barrister Ejiofor, they must take full responsibility for the outcome. It is improper and unacceptable to attempt to share blame with someone who was not involved in the Appeal’s prosecution or dismissal. Ejiofor’s call for accountability is justified, and he reserves the right to resist any effort to associate him with a process he had no control over.
Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor has built a distinguished legal career based on professionalism and integrity. Any attempt to mislead the public by linking him to the outcome of this Appeal is deceptive, unacceptable, and must be comprehensively resisted. His position remains clear: he had no role in the Appeal’s outcome and should not be drawn into narratives designed to distort the facts.
Aloy Ejimakor made a vow in a statement issued on Friday while reacting to the ruling of the Court of Appeal, which, on Thursday, reaffirmed the 2017 Federal High Court judgment that outlawed IPOB’s activities in Nigeria. The prescription, which IPOB has consistently contested, was challenged in 2018, with the group seeking to reverse the court’s decision.
In 2023, a High Court sitting in Enugu State nullified IPOB’s proscription, awarded ₦8 billion in damages, and declared the proscription unconstitutional. This ruling was a major legal victory for IPOB at the time. However, the recent Court of Appeal ruling has now reaffirmed the earlier proscription, setting aside the High Court's decision.
Given this complex legal background, it is even more imperative that responsibility for the failed Appeal is properly placed on those who handled it. Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor’s name should not be unjustly linked to a legal process from which he had formally withdrawn.
Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor remains committed to upholding justice and transparency in legal advocacy. Any attempt to misrepresent his role in this Appeal is both misleading and unacceptable. The public should be guided by the facts, not by narratives designed to deflect accountability.
Daniel Okonkwo for Profile International Human Rights Advocate.
 |
Comments