The prosecution of Mr Uzoma Ilomuanya by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) has taken a contentious turn, with his family accusing the anti-narcotics body of conducting a “media trial” capable of undermining the integrity of ongoing judicial proceedings.

Mr Philip Ilomuanya, younger brother to the defendant currently standing trial before the Federal High Court, Lagos, on drug-related charges, alleged that the agency’s public statements were designed to create a presumption of guilt in the court of public opinion.

He argued that such actions risk prejudicing not only public perception but also the broader judicial process, warning that they could erode the constitutional guarantee of fair hearing.

“The agency has resorted to media trials to create an impression of guilt, which can influence public sentiment and potentially undermine the fairness of the proceedings,” Philip said.

The NDLEA had earlier issued a statement claiming that the 58-year-old Ilomuanya had been on its wanted list, as well as that of British authorities, for over 15 years before his eventual arrest following what it described as a prolonged manhunt.

However, the defendant’s brother disputed this narrative, pointing to court records which, according to him, showed that Ilomuanya has been standing trial since 2021 after his arrest in 2018.

He further noted that the case has traversed multiple judicial officers, including Justices Saliu Seidu, A. Awogboro and currently Musa Kakaki of the Federal High Court, Lagos.

According to him, available records indicate that the defendant has made no fewer than 18 court appearances between December 2021 and February 23, 2026, with NDLEA prosecutors actively participating in the proceedings.

Philip also challenged the circumstances surrounding the agency’s claim of a recent arrest, alleging that his brother was apprehended within the court premises shortly after proceedings on February 23, 2026.

“The claim of a 15-year manhunt raises serious questions. If the same agency has been prosecuting him in open court since 2021, how does he become a fugitive?” He asked.

He maintained that the NDLEA’s failure to disclose that its operatives had already testified during the trial further reinforces concerns about selective disclosure of facts.

Citing section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution (as altered), Philip warned that public narratives shaped by incomplete or misleading information could result in what he described as “trial by public opinion,” with potentially irreversible reputational consequences even if the courts eventually rule in favour of the defendant.

“The danger of half-truths is that they create a hostile environment for the accused and can lead to public verdicts that are difficult to reverse,” he added.