The Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Defence Consortium, representing the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has vehemently disagreed with assertions from Nigeria’s Defence Headquarters that the recent imprisonment of Kanu has led to a reduction in insecurity in the South-East. Major General Michael Onoja, the Director of Defence Media Operations, claimed that intensified military operations and Kanu’s incarceration have brought stability to the region.
In a statement released on January 2, Onyedikachi Ifedi, Esq., a spokesperson for the Defence Consortium, countered these claims, asserting that the Nigerian government is primarily responsible for the ongoing insecurity that has afflicted the South-East. Ifedi criticized Onoja’s statements as a “cynical rewriting of history” and an affront to the lives lost due to state violence.
The Kanu defense team pointed to several tragic incidents to illustrate their position, including the Nkpor massacre, where peaceful mourners and protesters were killed, the shooting of unarmed youths at the National High School in Aba, and violent incidents surrounding a solidarity rally for Trump in Port Harcourt. They also referenced the invasion of Kanu’s home in Umuahia, resulting in the deaths of at least 28 individuals.
The statement expressed outrage over the military’s self-proclamation as a “stabilizing force,” labeling it grotesque given its history of opening fire on civilians. The defence team emphasized that the Nigerian military’s current narrative is simply a form of propaganda aimed at deflecting blame onto IPOB, Biafra, and Kanu instead of confronting its violent record.
Highlighting issues of political violence and criminal networks, the Kanu defense team argued that these problems were not instigated by IPOB but were instead orchestrated by politicians and security collaborators who benefit from the chaos. They referenced retired General T.Y. Danjuma’s accusations of military collusion with violent groups as evidence of this complicity.
In refuting the claims of improved security in the South-East, the consortium noted that true security cannot be defined by fear-induced silence, arbitrary detentions, or military presence. They contended that such conditions constitute repression rather than genuine peace.
The defense team demanded the unconditional release of Nnamdi Kanu, asserting that his detention contravenes both domestic and international legal standards. They called for independent investigations into reported military massacres and an end to the repression of peaceful political expression in the region.
The statement concluded by highlighting the growing international awareness of the Nigerian state’s tendency to fabricate enemies to distract from deeper issues of corruption and failure within the elite, reiterating their commitment to fighting for Kanu’s freedom and advocating for the rights of the Biafran people.
