The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has dismissed the recent remarks by Mr. Onoh, who alleged that IPOB is obstructing the release of our leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. His comments are both unfortunate and uninformed. Ordinarily, IPOB does not waste time responding to personal opinions, but when such views attempt to twist the truth and shield the Nigerian government’s lawlessness, a firm rebuttal becomes necessary.
1. Discharged and Acquitted — Yet Still Detained
It must be clearly stated: Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has already been discharged and acquitted by a competent court of law on the same charges that Justice James Omotosho is being asked to entertain again on October 26, 2025.
Under Nigeria’s Constitution, and indeed any constitutional democracy, the principle of double jeopardy forbids trying a citizen twice for the same offence. Instead of asking IPOB to “beg” for Kanu’s release, well-meaning citizens like Onoh should demand that the Nigerian government respect its own courts and Constitution.
2. Trial Under a Dead Law
The Nigerian state is attempting to prosecute Kanu under the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act (TPAA) 2013—a law that has already been repealed by the TPAA 2022. No credible judiciary anywhere in the world can sustain criminal proceedings under a repealed statute. This is not just illegal but a disgraceful stain on Nigeria’s justice system.
3. Abuse of Section 36 of the Constitution
Kanu is being persecuted through civil ex parte orders, which Nigeria seeks to weaponize into criminal liability. This is a direct violation of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees fair hearing. No legal system—whether in Africa or the wider world—permits criminal conviction to flow from civil proceedings. Onoh’s failure to recognize this abuse only helps the government’s propaganda.
4. No Jurisdiction in the First Place
Even if one ignores all the above, the TPAA 2022 is explicit: in cases of alleged cross-border terrorism, prosecution cannot proceed without approval from the courts of the country where the alleged rendition occurred. In Kanu’s case, that country is Kenya. Nigeria never obtained such approval, stripping Justice Omotosho of jurisdiction from the very outset.
The Real Issue
The problem is not IPOB. The problem is a Nigerian state that refuses to obey its own Constitution, aided by compromised judges who bend the law to serve political masters. For almost five years, Kanu has been kept in unlawful detention, a victim of both Nigerian impunity and British complicity.
Conclusion
Rather than attacking IPOB, Onoh and others should channel their voices towards holding Nigeria and Britain accountable for the illegal detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. IPOB will continue to defend our leader with facts, law, and truth until justice prevails.
Signed:
Comrade Emma Powerful
Spokesperson, Media & Publicity Secretary for IPOB
