The Free Nnamdi Kanu Protest’, convened by a former presidential candidate of the African Action Congress, AAC, Omoyele Sowore went on as scheduled on Monday across the Federal Capital Territory, FCT.
Sowore, who had mobilized many Nigerians from across the country to join the demonstration, planned that protesters would march to the Presidential Villa in Abuja to demand for Kanu’s release.
But Justice M.G. Umar, issued an order on October 17, 2025, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2202/2025 — Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Omoyele Sowore & 4 others, restraining the protesters and other groups from staging any form of demonstrations for Kanu’s release in certain areas within the FCT.
The ruling barred 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 line with Justice Umar’s ruling on the protest, men of the Nigeria Police Force barricaded all roads leading to the areas mentioned by the ruling, thereby, frustrating Sowore and his fellow protesters from ensuring that their plans materialized.
While barricading the roads, the police also shot teargas canisters to scare commuters and possible protesters from using the roads.
Despite attempts by security operatives to stifle the protesters from carrying out their programme, Sowore and the demonstrators moved to other areas like Utako and Apo areas of Abuja where they protested.
In the course of 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, FCT, Command CID.
News360 Info reports that they have now been charged to court and remanded in Kuje Prison by a magistrate court.
However, reactions have been pouring in after the protest, with Nigerians expressing divergent views.
Protest not in Kanu’s interest, rule of law and counter-productive – Ex-Arewa Forum scribe, Anthony Sani
A former Secretary of Arewa Consultative Forum, ACF, Anthony Sani, faulted the protest, stressing that it’s not in the interest of the rule of law. He described it as counter-productive.
Sani told a source that: “Nnamdi Kanu is standing trial for serious charges of terrorism, secession, and because he has denied the allegations and some Nigerians do not believe he, Nnamdi Kanu, has committed the offense.
“The best approach is for the law to run its course after which the government would decide what to do in the larger interest of the rule of law, justice and national unity.
“To embark on protests for the release of Nnamdi Kanu is not in the interest of rule of law and, thus, 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 shown that they have no faith in the rule of law by joining the protest.
He noted that Nigerians want to know if Kanu is actually guilty, stressing that the forceful release of the agitator won’t reveal if he committed the offenses alleged against him.
“By joining the protests, Kanu’s lawyers have not demonstrated their faith in the rule of law, especially when regard is paid to the fact that forceful release of Nnamdi Kanu would not enable Nigerians to know whether he committed the offense or not.
“That is to say, Nigerians deserve to know whether Nnamdi Kanu has committed the offense for which he is being charged or not
“I said forceful release of Nnamdi Kanu without allowing the law to run its course would be counter productive and not serve the interest of rule of law,” he further told DAILY POST.
On his part, activist lawyer based in Abuja, Maduabuchi Idam declared that the free Nnamdi Kanu protest was a massive success despite attempts by the police to disperse protesters.
Idam noted that for the first time in the history of Biafra agitation, eminent Nigerians from different ethnic backgrounds openly identified with Kanu and his struggle.
He told a source: “The protest was a massive success. The collective disillusionment against the selective injustice meted out to Mr. Nnamdi Kanu and the entire Biafra agitators have been unanimously echoed across ethnic divides.
“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.”
Kanu’s legal team reserve constitutional right to express their opinion
Idam, while countering Onanuga, maintained that Ejimakor has the right to express his opinion on any issue.
He said: “On the Presidency’s statement that Kanu’s counsel should be sanctioned for sub judice, I must state clearly that Mr. Ejimakor is an Igbo man, a Nigerian, and a lawyer before becoming Mr. Kanu’s counsel.
“Therefore, he is clothed with the constitutional right to express his opinion on any national issue, including matters affecting him— such as the trial of Mr. Nnamdi Kanu and other instances of injustice— provided he does not draw conclusions for the court or pass judgment on issues pending before it.
“It is most disappointing that a government with little or no regard for the rule of law is quick to identify which citizens should be sanctioned for sub judice. The state must refrain from weaponizing its powers against free speech.”
Free Nnamdi Kanu protest will continue to have positive impact
Idam noted that the protest has undoubtedly succeeded and will “continue to have a positive impact on the state. Yet, rather than addressing the core issues raised, the government appears more eager to find who to sanction instead of doing the needful.
“The question that begs for an answer is: Who is actually benefiting from the continued detention of Mr. Kanu, especially considering that his prolonged incarceration cannot possibly outweigh the public interest served by releasing him—just as several convicts, including those on death row, have been released in the recent past.
“The state must act wisely and release him forthwith, rather than further inflaming the polity.”
Meanwhile, residents of Abia, Imo, Enugu, and Ebonyi States observed sit-at-home, thereby deserting the streets in solidarity with the protest held in Abuja.
