Akanbi’s lawyers criticize Falana over murder allegations, accusing him of bias and media manipulation

Legal representatives of Hammed Tajudeen Akanbi have issued a sharp rebuke against Senior Advocate of Nigeria and human rights lawyer Femi Falana, who publicly called for their client’s prosecution on charges that include murder, attempted murder and destruction of property.

Following reports in several national newspapers on 10 May 2026, Akanbi’s counsel, Mr. Adedotun Ajulo, Esq., described Falana’s remarks as hasty, irresponsible and lacking a legal basis.

Ajulo said Falana’s statements were an attempt to influence public opinion and interfere with ongoing investigations through media pressure.

“With due respect, the intervention by the Learned Silk is premature, reckless, and legally indefensible. It falls short of the standard expected from a senior member of the Bar,” the statement read.

The legal team reminded that under Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution, Akanbi is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court, noting that investigations into the matter only began on 16 April 2026.

Ajulo argued that demanding prosecution before investigations were complete undermines due process and the principles of a fair hearing.

He questioned the basis of Falana’s allegations, asking whether any credible evidence linked Akanbi to the crimes or if the public statements were merely aimed at generating sympathy and outrage.

The lawyers also pointed to evidence showing that Akanbi was not in Nigeria on 18 April 2023 and 26 August 2024, the dates on which Sheriff Ishola Salami and Prince Akinloye were allegedly killed.

According to the statement, none of the suspects currently on trial in connection with the killings have implicated Akanbi in their confessional statements or testimonies.

“There is no direct or circumstantial evidence connecting our client with any of the persons facing prosecution in the matter,” the lawyers said.

Ajulo dismissed claims that Akanbi had previously been convicted for land grabbing or destruction of property, insisting that no Nigerian court had ever found him guilty of such offences.

The statement further accused former Lagos State Commissioner of Police Jimoh Moshood of mishandling the case and abusing legal procedures. The lawyers alleged that Akanbi was declared wanted on 19 February 2026 without a prior invitation or a valid court order.

They claimed that shortly after the declaration, some individuals invaded and vandalised Akanbi’s property in the Ajiran community, while police authorities allegedly ignored petitions supported by photographic and video evidence.

Ajulo disclosed that a petition submitted to the then Inspector‑General of Police on 23 February 2026 led to the withdrawal of the case file from Moshood and its transfer to the Force Criminal Investigation Department, Alagbon, Lagos, for a fresh investigation.

He also stated that a court had earlier nullified an arrest and remand order obtained against Akanbi, while another court reportedly rejected a similar application and instead ordered that the businessman be properly invited rather than arrested arbitrarily.

According to Ajulo, it was based on those court rulings and the reassignment of the investigation that Akanbi returned to Nigeria to cooperate with authorities.

The lawyers, however, described his eventual arrest in Cotonou, Benin Republic, as questionable and contrary to existing court directives.

They rejected suggestions that Akanbi was a fugitive, arguing that his movements and conduct in Benin Republic did not reflect that of someone evading justice.

“If our client was truly on the run, he would not have moved openly in a foreign country using a Nigerian‑registered SUV customised with his name,” the statement added.

The legal team further condemned the public display of Akanbi in handcuffs and leg chains on 20 April 2026, describing it as a calculated media show intended to humiliate him and prejudice public opinion.

Ajulo alleged that another petition later prompted the police authorities to once again remove the case file from Moshood and reassign it within the force hierarchy.

He accused Falana of overlooking major inconsistencies and procedural irregularities while lending support to what he described as a compromised process.

“One would expect a lawyer of his standing to critically examine these contradictions rather than amplify them against a citizen who has not been convicted,” he said.

The lawyers further suggested that Falana’s public posture raised concerns about possible undisclosed interests influencing his position.

According to the statement, Akanbi will not be subjected to public persecution or sacrificed for media sensationalism, warning that legal action could be taken against individuals spreading false narratives capable of undermining his constitutional rights.

“The criminal justice system must not be turned into a media‑driven spectacle controlled by influential voices. Justice must always be guided by evidence, due process, and constitutional safeguards,” the statement concluded.