Abuja was thrown into a mix of tension and defiance on Monday as the Free Nnamdi Kanu Protest, organized by activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore, took center stage across the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) despite a court order banning such demonstrations in key areas.
The protest, aimed at demanding the release of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), drew supporters from across Nigeria, including legal representatives, human rights activists, and sympathizers of Kanu’s cause.
However, plans to march to the Presidential Villa were abruptly disrupted following a restraining order issued on October 17, 2025, by Justice M.G. Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja. The ruling in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2202/2025 – Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Omoyele Sowore & 4 others prohibited demonstrations around sensitive government zones such as Aso Rock Villa, National Assembly Complex, Force Headquarters, Court of Appeal, Eagle Square, and Shehu Shagari Way.
In compliance with the order, security operatives mounted heavy barricades across major roads leading to the restricted areas. Witnesses reported that police fired teargas canisters to disperse commuters and deter protesters, creating widespread commotion within the city.
Despite the heightened security and intimidation, Sowore and other demonstrators regrouped at Utako and Apo districts, where they continued their peaceful protest.
During the demonstration, police reportedly arrested and detained Kanu’s brother, Prince Emmanuel, his Special Counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, and several others. The group was subsequently charged to court and remanded in Kuje Prison by an Abuja Magistrate Court.
The event has since triggered a storm of mixed reactions nationwide, with citizens and public figures expressing sharply divided opinions on the protest’s significance and legality.
“Protest is counterproductive” Anthony Sani
Former Secretary of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Anthony Sani, condemned the protest, describing it as “counterproductive and not in the interest of the rule of law.”
Sani argued that Nnamdi Kanu’s ongoing trial for terrorism and secession must be allowed to run its course.
“Nnamdi Kanu is standing trial for serious charges. The best approach is for the law to run its course before the government decides what to do in the larger interest of justice and national unity,” he said. “Protesting for his release undermines the rule of law and sends the wrong message.”
He also criticized Kanu’s legal representatives for participating in the protest, insisting it showed a lack of confidence in the judicial process. “By joining the protests, Kanu’s lawyers have not demonstrated faith in the rule of law,” he said. “Forceful release of Kanu will only create more confusion rather than resolution.”
“A massive success” Human rights lawyer Maduabuchi Idam
On the other hand, Abuja-based human rights lawyer Maduabuchi Idam hailed the protest as a “massive success,” emphasizing that it marked a new phase in the struggle for justice.
“For the first time in the history of the Biafra agitation, well-meaning Nigerians from various ethnic backgrounds have openly identified with Mr. Kanu and his struggle,” Idam said. “The collective disillusionment against selective injustice has been echoed across ethnic divides.”
He defended Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, arguing that he has a constitutional right to express his opinion on national matters. “Mr. Ejimakor is a Nigerian and a lawyer before being Kanu’s counsel. He has every right to speak on issues that affect him and his client, provided he does not pass judgment on a case still before the court,” he explained.
Idam further criticized the government for what he described as “weaponizing power against free speech”, insisting that the protest will continue to have a positive impact on Nigeria’s democracy.
“The question remains: who benefits from Kanu’s continued detention?” he asked. “His prolonged incarceration cannot outweigh the public interest served by releasing him. The government should act wisely and release him, rather than inflaming the polity.”
Meanwhile, residents in parts of the South East, including Abia, Imo, Enugu, and Ebonyi States, observed a sit-at-home in solidarity with the Abuja protesters, leaving major streets deserted.
As tension lingers, the protest has reignited debate over justice, national unity, and the rule of law, exposing once again the deep divisions surrounding Nnamdi Kanu’s incarceration and the government’s handling of his case.
