Temitayo Olumofe
The #FreeNnamdiKanu protest took place on Monday, October 20, 2025. It was a mass demonstration demanding the release of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), who has been detained since June 2021. The protest was led by activist Omoyele Sowore and saw participation primarily in Abuja and the South-East states of Nigeria. Despite court orders restricting protests near sensitive government sites like Aso Rock Villa, the demonstrators marched peacefully with determination to have their voices heard.
The announcement for the protest was made weeks earlier, with Sowore declaring October 20 as a historic day for the #FreeNnamdiKanuNow movement. Protesters assembled early in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), particularly in Abuja, ready to march towards government seats of power, including Aso Rock Villa. Security forces were heavily deployed, with checkpoints and roadblocks on major routes to prevent access to sensitive areas.
According to reports, several key roads in Abuja and South-East were shut down or heavily policed, causing paralysis in traffic and public activities. Tear gas was used by security personnel from as early as 7 a.m. to disperse crowds that defied police orders to limit protest areas. Despite a Federal High Court injunction, which barred protesters from assembling close to government establishments, organizers vowed to proceed peacefully. Sowore emphasized the legal right to demonstrate, stating, “Our legal team will challenge any alleged court order as soon as we receive it on Monday. But let it be known that nothing will hinder this mass movement”.
The protest’s visible scenes varied between peaceful marches and moments of tense standoffs with security officers. While some protesters moved forward undeterred, there were incidents like the assault of the Executive Director of Enough Is Enough, Yemi Adamolekun, by security officers, which sparked public outcry over restricted freedoms. In addition, gunshots reported in parts of the capital caused some protesters to disperse abruptly, adding to an atmosphere of uncertainty.
Across major cities in the South-East, residents showed solidarity by staying indoors or joining protests that disrupted normal daily life. The protest’s timing on the fifth anniversary of the EndSARS movement added symbolic weight, linking the calls for justice and freedom across different Nigerian activism fronts.
The #FreeNnamdiKanu protest drew mixed reactions nationally, with significant political and public discourse following the event. Officials from the federal government largely condemned the protest. For instance, President Tinubu’s Special Adviser, Bayo Onanuga, criticized the participation of Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, labelling the protest “shambolic” and undermining the rule of law. Conversely, Sowore defended the protest’s peaceful nature and Ejimakor’s involvement, asserting that even Senior Advocates of Nigeria would join if Kanu was not released.
Political parties like the All Progressives Congress (APC), Lagos chapter, condemned the demonstration, describing it as politically motivated and disruptive to public order. Meanwhile, many civil society groups and activists expressed support for the protest, highlighting concerns over Kanu’s prolonged detention and the broader implications for civil rights and freedom of expression in Nigeria.
The protest also reignited debates about the Nigerian justice system’s handling of separatist-related cases. Kanu has been charged with terrorism and proscribed for his separatist activities seeking an independent Biafra state. His detention since 2021 without a concluded trial continues to evoke strong emotions in parts of the country. This protest reflected a growing call for due process and transparency in politically charged cases.
The implications of the #FreeNnamdiKanu protests stretch across political, social, and security dimensions. On the one hand, it firmly put the spotlight back on Nnamdi Kanu’s detention and the government’s approach to handling separatist agitations. The protest emphasized the demand for justice and respect for peaceful dissent even on controversial issues.
On the other hand, the protest exposed stark divisions in Nigerian society and government, with allegations of double standards in permitting demonstrations. The Federal High Court judge M.G. Umar highlighted this contradiction by questioning why opposing protests against Kanu’s release previously occurred without similar restrictions. This underscores ongoing tensions between state security priorities and citizens’ rights to protest.
Whether the protest made sense depends largely on the perspective. Supporters argue it was a justified exercise of democratic rights aimed at highlighting judicial and political grievances. As Sowore said, it was a “mass movement” necessary to sustain the push towards Kanu’s release and broader national reforms.
Critics, including some government officials, contend that the protest was ill-timed, disruptive, and politically exploited. They argue it risked undermining legal processes and public order, potentially inciting further unrest.
The protest demonstrated both the vibrancy and volatility of Nigerian politics and civil society. While it brought attention and solidarity for a contested cause, it also revealed the limits and challenges of protest in a complex, divided national context.
Beyond immediate outcomes, the protest has lasting implications. It reinvigorates a national conversation about ethnic inclusion, judicial transparency, and the right to protest in Nigeria’s fragile democracy. The calls from the Ohanaeze Youth Congress and others for economic lockdowns and political negotiations underline that such movements can influence policy and shape the country’s unity or disintegration. Whether the government responds with openness and statesmanship or suppression will be a defining test of Nigeria’s future.
The #FreeNnamdiKanu protest was more than a call to free one man; it was a reflection of larger societal fissures and demands for justice, inclusion, and national healing. Its symbolic and practical impact will depend on how both activists and the government engage moving forward.
The protest energized a significant segment of the Nigerian populace to assert their voices and rights, underscoring the vibrancy of civic engagement in difficult times. Yet, it also highlighted the difficult balance Nigeria must strike between security, legal order, and respecting democratic freedoms. The coming months and years will show whether this protest was a catalyst for positive change or a sign of deeper divisions to be addressed.