SUNTV Global Report | March 7, 2026
Human rights lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has firmly denied reports alleging that he received ₦10 million for representing Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), during his terrorism trial.
Ejiofor, who has long served as one of Kanu’s legal representatives, insisted that his services were provided pro bono, stressing that he never collected professional fees for the case.
The controversy erupted after reports circulated claiming that IPOB’s leadership released financial details suggesting that ₦10 million was paid to Ejiofor through his office manager on August 13, 2021.
Earlier, the IPOB Finance Directorate, headed by Madam Nnennaya Anya, had also stated that about $100,000 was paid to senior lawyer Mike Ozekhome and Ejiofor for legal services related to Kanu’s trial.
However, in a strongly worded rebuttal on Saturday, Ejiofor dismissed the claims as false and misleading, insisting that he never personally received any payment from Kanu for his legal representation.
According to him, any funds provided by Kanu were meant for other lawyers and their support staff, including Barristers Nnaemeka Ejiofor and Maxwell Okpara, who were also involved in the defence team.
“It beats my imagination that such claims could be circulated without giving me the opportunity to clarify the facts,” Ejiofor said.
He further questioned the credibility of the allegation, arguing that if such payment were truly meant as legal fees for him, it would have been transferred directly to his firm’s account or personal account, rather than routed through a colleague.
To clear the air, Ejiofor revealed that he had directed Barrister Chinwe to publish the names of the lawyers who actually received the payments along with the relevant transaction receipts.
The lawyer described the allegations as a “desperate attempt to manufacture facts”, particularly after he publicly maintained that his representation of Kanu was completely free of charge.
He also urged media organizations to verify claims with him before publishing such reports, emphasizing the need for responsible journalism.
The development adds another layer of controversy to the legal battle surrounding Kanu, whose case continues to attract significant national and international attention.
