Abuja – The Directorate of Legal Affairs, Research, and Global Communications of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has issued a strongly worded statement clarifying what it describes as “deliberate misinformation, legal inconsistencies, and media distortions” surrounding the ongoing trial of its leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.
In the statement signed by Onyekachi Ifedi Esq., the directorate asserted that no credible case has been made against Kanu, despite over four years of prosecution and multiple amendments to the charges.
“No named victims, no forensic evidence, and no direct testimony have been presented to link Kanu to terrorism or incitement,” the statement read.
The group further alleged that the prosecution is relying on laws that have since been repealed, including the Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2013 and the Customs and Excise Management Act (CEMA), which it claims no longer form a valid legal basis for the charges.
Transmitter Charge Labeled “Baseless”
The statement also dismissed as “legally incompetent” the Federal Government’s charge that Kanu illegally imported a transmitter in 2015 to promote terrorism. It argued that no customs documents or proof of concealment were ever submitted in court, and that the charge sheet was procedurally flawed, lacking proper endorsement when amended.
IPOB Status and Proscription Challenged
Referencing a 2017 ruling by Justice Binta Nyako, the group insisted that IPOB is not an unlawful society. The ruling, made in an open court with both parties present, has never been overturned. The subsequent proscription of IPOB by the federal government, it claimed, was obtained ex parte, without the group’s representation — a move the statement argued violates both Nigerian constitutional guarantees and international legal standards.
EndSARS Allegations Rejected
The directorate also pushed back against efforts to link IPOB or its leader to the EndSARS protests, calling such claims “false and defamatory.” It cited findings from the Lagos State Judicial Panel of Inquiry, which pointed fingers at Nigerian security forces—not IPOB—for the violence and fatalities that occurred during the protests.
Nnamdi Kanu’s only call was for a peaceful referendum, not war – IPOB
Reiterating a longstanding claim, the group condemned Kanu’s “extraordinary rendition” from Kenya to Nigeria in 2021, calling it an illegal abduction that violated both domestic and international law.
It drew parallels with the landmark Dikko v. State (1984) case, in which the Supreme Court of Nigeria discharged a northern Nigerian man abducted from the Republic of Niger, solely on the grounds that his extradition was illegal.
“Justice Garba Mohammed, who ruled that Kanu could still be tried despite the illegality of his rendition, owes the Nigerian public and international community an explanation,” the statement said. “Is there one law for the Sahel North and another for the South-East?”
The IPOB Directorate called on the Nigerian government to:
Respect due process and Kanu’s fundamental rights.
End the reliance on repealed laws and politically motivated prosecutions.
Cease the media trial and propaganda tactics.
The group also urged journalists, civil society, and the international community to scrutinize the case more closely and advocate for “justice rooted in truth and the rule of law.”
The statement comes amid growing local and international attention on the trial, with concerns mounting over alleged violations of legal norms and human rights in the handling of the case
