The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has accused Nigerian authorities of engineering insecurity in the South-East to justify the arrest, detention and conviction of its leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, describing the process as a miscarriage of justice built on falsehoods and political motives.
In a press statement issued on Tuesday and signed by its Media and Publicity Secretary, Comrade Emma Powerful, IPOB alleged that violence in the South-East escalated only after Kanu’s extraordinary rendition and arrest in June 2021, claiming that unnamed political actors deliberately created chaos in order to pin the blame on him.
According to the group, these actors had long been uncomfortable with Kanu’s growing influence, particularly following mass IPOB rallies in cities such as Aba and Ekwulobia in 2017. IPOB recalled that a Federal High Court in Abuja had, in March 2017, ruled that the organisation was not a terrorist group, arguing that its subsequent proscription was politically motivated and carried out through an ex parte order.
The group also referenced the killing of IPOB members during a rally organised in solidarity with former United States President Donald Trump in Port Harcourt on January 20, 2017, as well as the military’s Operation Python Dance, which it alleged was aimed at eliminating Kanu and resulted in the deaths of unarmed civilians, including 28 people at his country home.
Central to IPOB’s latest statement is its criticism of the judgment delivered by Justice Binta Nyako’s court (and later referenced by Justice James Omotosho), which cited insecurity in the South-East from 2022 onward and attributed it to Kanu. IPOB described this reasoning as “judicial absurdity,” insisting that Kanu had already been in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS), held in solitary confinement in Abuja, without access to communication or the outside world, during the period in question.
“Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was in total state custody, held incommunicado, yet he was blamed for events allegedly carried out outside prison walls,” the statement said, arguing that no credible evidence was presented to directly link him to killings or violent acts.
IPOB further challenged the prosecution to identify victims, witnesses or forensic evidence connecting Kanu to the alleged crimes, insisting that none were produced in court. The group claimed that public discourse had been deliberately shaped to suppress scrutiny and critical questioning.
Calling on the international community, foreign governments, human rights organisations, and members of the global legal community, IPOB urged independent scrutiny of Kanu’s conviction. It maintained that the case represents the criminalisation of political dissent rather than a genuine counterterrorism effort.
“This conviction is built on manufactured insecurity, propaganda and the absence of evidence,” IPOB asserted, warning that history would judge those who, in its view, used fear and instability to silence a political opponent.
The Nigerian government and security agencies have consistently maintained that Kanu is being prosecuted in accordance with the law, citing national security concerns and court orders. However, IPOB’s statement is likely to further intensify debate, both locally and internationally, over due process, judicial independence and the handling of separatist agitations in Nigeria.
0 Comments