Frederick Nwajagu, the Eze Ndigbo of Ajao Estate, has filed an appeal against his conviction by the Lagos State High Court at Tafawa Balewa Square for unlawfully parading himself as a titled chief in Lagos.
In a notice of appeal submitted by his lawyer, Emefo Etudo, Mr Nwajagu is challenging the constitutionality of Sections 26-36 of the Obas and Chiefs of Lagos State Law (1981).
|
|
He argued that they violated his rights to freedom of expression and association as enshrined in Sections 39 and 40 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).
He is urging the appellate court to overturn his conviction and grant him a full acquittal.
|
|
|
|---|
Background
In January 2024, a trial judge, Yetunde Adesanya, acquitted and discharged Mr Nwajagu of terrorism charges, ruling that the Lagos State Government failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, the court found him guilty of unlawfully presenting himself as a titled chief, an offence under the Obas and Chiefs Law of Lagos State (1981).
The court sentenced him to one year in prison without an option of a fine.
However, given that Mr Nwajagu had already spent over two years in custody during the trial, he was deemed to have completed his sentence and was released.
Mr Nwajagu, 67, was arrested on 1 April 2023 after a video surfaced online in which he allegedly threatened to invite members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to Lagos to protect Igbo properties.
Mr Nwajagu was charged with conspiracy and breach of public peace.
The chief magistrate, Peter Nwaka, ordered that Mr Nwajagu be kept at the Ikoyi custodial facility for 30 days before adjourning the case until 3 May 2023.
He was arraigned on a nine-count charge at the Lagos High Court in Tafawa Balewa Square.
The “Eze Ndigbo” title
The title, meaning “King of the Igbo people,” traditionally refers to a monarch or high priest within Igbo communities. 1 However, it has evolved outside of Igboland to describe a community leader representing Igbo interests in a specific area.
While other tribes have similar practices for electing community leaders outside their home states, the use of “Eze Ndigbo” has been controversial. In February 2025, the South East Council of Traditional Rulers banned its use outside the Igbo region, suggesting “Onyedu Ndigbo” as an alternative.
It remains unclear who officially appointed Mr Nwajagu as the Eze Ndigbo of Ajao Estate, as local Igbo communities or associations typically confer these titles. This highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the use and legitimacy of the “Eze Ndigbo” title outside of Igboland.
Nwajagu’s appeal
In his appeal, Mr Nwajagu contends that his conviction was unconstitutional, stating that his cultural activities fall within his fundamental rights to association and expression.
His legal team argues that the Obas and Chiefs Law of Lagos State (1981), which formed the basis of his conviction, contradicts the 1999 Constitution and should be declared void.
The appeal also claims that his conviction under Section 34 of the Obas and Chiefs Law conflicts with Section 166 of the Administration of Criminal Justice (Repeal and Re-enactment) Law of Lagos State (2015).
The defence maintains that the prosecution failed to prove that he publicly proclaimed himself a traditional ruler or established a kingship, making the conviction unjustified.
It further argues that the Eze Ndigbo institution he represents is not recognised under Lagos law and, therefore, cannot be subjected to its traditional chieftaincy regulations.
READ ALSO: Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Ikwere people, and identity construction, By Jideofor Adibe
“The defendant did not present himself to the general public as a traditional ruler or create public awareness of such a title.
“His cultural activities within his private residence cannot, by themselves, establish a kingship or chieftaincy,” the defence said.
Meanwhile, one of Mr Nwajagu’s lawyers, Fabian Onwughalu, former president of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Lagos chapter, has vowed to fight for his full exoneration, insisting that the prosecution failed to prove its case.
No date has been set for the appeal hearing.
