The Nation Newspaper

Tag: IPOB

  • Kanu’s no election in Anambra stands, says IPOB coordinator

    Kanu’s no election in Anambra stands, says IPOB coordinator

    The leadership of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has described the message accredited to the leader of the group and Director of Radio Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, as false and mischievous.

    Recall there were reports in circulation that Kanu had retracted his earlier comments that election would not hold in Anambra in November which has caused confusion amongst his followers.

    Efforts to reach the Spokesman and Abia Coordinator of the group, Emma Powerful and Ikechukwu failed, but Celestine Ohajianya, Abia South Coordinator of IPOB in a telephone conversation with newsmen dismissed such reports.

    Ohajianya, who disclosed that the group was in a meeting at press time, described the report as malicious and one coming from their detractors.

    According to him, the statement made by Kanu that election won’t hold in Anambra State come November still stands.

    He stated that the position of Nnamdi was that it is either that the federal government of Nigeria holds referendum or should forget about holding election in Anambra or any part of the southeast.

  • Guber Poll: Anambra lawyers attack IPOB

    Guber Poll: Anambra lawyers attack IPOB

    •Accuse Kanu of breeding anarchy

    Some lawyers in Anambra State have warned the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to stop frightening people ahead of the November 18 governorship election.

    The lawyers under the aegis of Anambra State Lawyers in Defence of Democracy (ASLADD) appealed to Governor Willie Obiano and security operatives to deal decisively with the secessionists before things get out of hand.

    They accused IPOB and its leader of breeding anarchy by claiming the election will not hold, vowing not to fold their hands to allow any person or group of persons to destroy the system.

    Convener of the lawyer’s group, Johnmary Jideobi, in a letter to Obiano yesterday in Akwa pointed out IPOB had decided to introduce violence into the nation’s electoral process.

    The letter was entitled “The 2017 Anambra State governorship election and the imperative of ending the impunity of anarchists before it is too late”.

    According to them: “The fulcrum of this urgent letter is to express the way we feel by the strident opposition mounted by the IPOB to the conduct of the 2017 governorship election in Anambra state”

    ”We have chosen to write you on this, principally because we are involved. We are involved because we too are Anambrarians.

    “We are involved because democracy has come under imminent threat in our beloved state.

    ”We are involved because the future of every nation’s democracy lies on the shoulders of lawyers.

    “We are involved because lawyers are saddled with the sacred and abiding duties of enlightening the society, upholding the rule of law and defending our constitution, which is the most sacred document that holds our nation in balance and in being.

    ”We are involved because it is our incontestable right to contribute in defining and protecting the future in which we will live and raise our kids.

    “It is now clearly beyond any scintilla of argument that we have a legitimate interest in whatever plays out on the political scene of Anambra State of Nigeria.”

    The lawyers declared a boycott was an act of voluntary and intentional abstention as an expression of protest, usually for social, political, or environmental reasons.

    They added that if IPOB had stopped at directing its members to abstain from the polls, perhaps the present open letter would not have been of any use.

    ”But IPOB did not stop at that. It has now gone physical. In Onitsha, video evidence abound how IPOB members interrupted state activities where the governor went for a football tournament.

    “On another occasion, the governorship candidate of Progressives Peoples’ Alliance, PPA, Chief Godwin Ezemo, was confronted at a rally by members of IPOB.

    ”Only recently, the IPOB members invaded and desecrated St. Joseph’s Catholic Church, Ekwulobia in Aguata Local Government Area, where Governor Obiano was to worship.

    “It is now clear that going further to disrupt electioneering processes like football tournaments, campaign rallies and invading and desecrating the sacred places of worship as witnessed in St. Joseph’s Catholic Church, Ekwulobia, are acts clearly outside the meaning of the word “boycott”

    “Those are acts of outlawry. They are forerunners of anarchy. Anarchy is antithetical to democracy.

    “Anarchists are anti-democratic forces that must be opposed, whether in Nigeria or Biafra land.”

    They added: “A people even have the right in every democracy to reject what is good for them. Advocates of election boycott must begin to learn, accept and live with this democratic truth.”

    ”We pray that those who are actively seeking to return our dear Anambra state to the wasteful and inglorious days in the state be dismayed and turned back because they are our enemies”

    “For seeking to precipitate anarchy in the state of the iconic departed supreme leader of Biafra Dim Chukwuemeka Odimegwu Ojukwu, they are enemies of Biafra land.

    “They have no respect for the cherished memories of our departed supreme leader who in his matchless wisdom established APGA as a political party in the Nigerian Federation”

    “This is a party which IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu once headed its United Kingdom chapter and he has not told us what has changed between then and now.”

     

  • A few counterintuitive and inconvenient facts and challenges for IPOB – and all of us! (1)

    Nnamdi Kanu and the flag of IPOB

    Far more than Boko Haram or the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND), indeed far more than any separatist movement in our country, the Nigerian state faces now and will in the foreseeable future ahead of us face a far more intransigentand resilient insurrectionary enemy in the Nnamdi Kanu-led Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). This is not because IPOB is better organized, better financed or more battle-tested than any other irredentist movement in Nigeria. It is because more than any other similar organization or movement in the country, IPOB has clearly demonstrated that the popularity that it seems to enjoy in the country’s southeast, apart from being on its own profoundly troubling to the powers that be, is perhaps an indication that separatist populism has a much wider spread in Nigeria than we know or suspect. In other words, is IPOB symptomatic or is it not? That is the question.

    Frankly, I do not know the answer to this question. All I know, all I can say is that I suspect that the federal government fears that IPOB is indeed symptomatic of wider currents of separatist populism in Nigeria. Definitely, this is a claim about which IPOB itself is loud and insistent. I can also say that many of the members of the newspaper “commentariat” that have been calling for restructuring or re-federalization implicitly accept IPOB’s claim that it represents a tidal wave of undercurrents that run deep below the surface of political normality in our country. So again, is IPOB symptomatic?

    I remain uncertain about the truth or falsity of this claim, at least for as long as I am yet to see hundreds of thousandsof Nigerians running to the banner of other separatist organizations in the country in the manner in which they have responded to the clarion call of IPOB. If this is the question that IPOB poses to the Nigerian state, what of the questions that can or indeed ought to be posed to IPOB, questions indeed that beyond IPOB, can and ought to be posed to all of us? That is the subject of this piece. And it is indeed what I call counterintuitive and inconvenient facts and challenges to IPOB and all of us in the title of this essay.

    To provide a useful discursive context for this set of facts and challenges – of which there are five – let us assume that sooner or later, the Buhari administration will accede to IPOB’s number one demand, this being the holding of a referendum in the Southeast and the South-south zones of the country on whether “Biafrans” want to stay in or exit from Nigeria. The government has not shown the slightest inclination toward such a decision, but let us for the sake of argument assume that this happens later this year or early next year. Let us furtherassume that “Biafraxit” wins in the referendum, narrowly or by a wide margin, it does not matter. It is within the framework of such assumptions of such events that have not yet happened and indeed may never happen that I wish to pose the following five inconvenient facts and challenges mostly to IPOB but also to all Nigerians.

    One: There are no secure and impregnable borders against irredentism, separatism and self-division. This is so basic a fact of history and politics that even mono-ethnic nations and societies are not immune to its operation, Somalia being one of the most tragic examples of this principle in contemporary African affairs. Moreover, as everyone knows, “Biafra” is not mono-ethnic; it is multi-ethnic. I mention this fact regardless of any longstanding historical claims of “Igbo domination” by militants of minority ethnic groups in the Southeast and the South-south. I neither forget those claims nor lay any particular emphasis on them. My point is simply this: every society and nation in the world is prone to centrifugal tendencies based on both real and invented ideas of national belonging and otherness. IPOB’s “Biafra” is not exempt from this principle.

    Incidentally, IPOB likes to divide Nigeria into three “nations” only – Biafra, Oduduwa and Arewa. This is extremelyarbitrary and simplistic; and moreover, it will not stand up to rigorous scrutiny by historians of Nigerian colonial and postcolonial politics. But that is beside the point. What is important is that IPOB in particular and the existing Nigerian state in general cannot evade the operation of this principle, this law that holds that there are  no borders that can keep any nation in the world from centrifugal, separatist forces and tendencies.

    Two: We live in a post-colonial and perhaps post-imperial epoch in which anti-globalist,irredentist “nationalisms” based on xenophobia and demagogy are rife. As a consequence of this development, we are seeing the resurgence of popularand widespread expressions of hatred, fear and the use of violently degrading language against both local and foreign “others”, the likes of which many had thought humanity in general had transcended. In this historic context, IPOB is in the “good” company of movements and organizations like the Front Nationale in France; the Law and Justice Party of Poland; United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) of Britain; Jobbik, the Movement for a Better Hungary in that country; right-wing Zionism in Israel; and the make-America-strong-again “white nationalism” of Donald Trump within the Republican Party in the United States. Every one of these parties, movements or organizations has been remarkable in the successes it has achieved through the use of deliberately vile, intemperate and offensive language and ideas to consolidate support among its followers, to gain visibility and even notoriety in the world, and to intimidate its actual and potential opponents. As a matter of fact, this is precisely why Nnamdi Kanu and IPOB have expressed open admiration for the Israel of Benjamin Netanyahu and the America of Donald Trump.

    Some commentators have noticed that of recent, IPOB has been downplaying the diatribes and insults that “Radio Biafra”, its main media outlet, had been spewing out against the Oduduwa and Arewa “nations”. This is completely consistent with tendencies that have been observed among all the right-wing, irredentist movements of the contemporary world: as they grow more successful, as they leave the extremist fringe of society and enter the mainstream and/or actually become ruling parties, they begin to temper their rhetoric of demagoguery and xenophobia. For the most part, this is more a matter of tactics than of sincere moral and ideological convictions. At any rate, from now on, IPOB faces the considerable challenge of convincing both its supporters and the world at large that it is not a movement, an organization whose driving force derives from hatred, xenophobia and intolerance. This is quite a tall order because in and out of power, not a single one of the separatist populist parties of the contemporary world has succeeded in engaging this challenge, Trump and the French Front Nationale being particularly telling example of this failure.

    Three: There are compelling and even positive ideas and arguments on each side of the competing claims and counter-claims of integration and separatism, of the “stay” and the “exit” positions. In concrete terms, staying in or exiting from, say, Europe, Britain, Nigeria or any country in the world,each has its irrefutable considerations that are often extremely difficult for many people to decide one way or the other. But neither IPOB nor the Nigerian government seems aware or mindful of this fact. For the Buhari administration, it suffices simply to invoke the abstract principle of the inviolability of the unity of the country, especially as putatively stated in the Nigerian Constitution of 1999, as if constitutions are emanations of natural law and are not revisable documents that nations constantly and perpetually have to revisit, finetune or completely rewrite.

    On its part, IPOB has more or less declared a bitter internal feud against all Igbos and peoples of the Southeast and South-south that disagree with its views and projects. This feud is apparent in the war of words and actions between IPOB chieftains and the governors and ruling class politicians of the Southeast. But at a deeper level, radical and progressive activists and pundits from the region are more and more cornered and put on the defensive by the spectacular mobilizational successes of IPOB. I advise that all who care about and are temporarily confounded by IPOB and what it stands for in Nigeria and the African continent should look into how, in other continents and regions of the world, the challenge of separatist populism has been successfully engaged.

    Four: Justice, fairness, dignity and respect are indivisible; if they are withheld from or denied of any people, humanity in general is thereby diminished, especially human communities and individuals in close physical and socio-economic contiguity. In other words, you cannot demand justice, fairness, dignity and respect for your people and withhold them from other peoples. This is both an ethical absolute and a matter of enlightened and pragmatic self-interest: what you do to others, they will do to you. IPOB seems totally unaware of or even contemptuous of this principle. The Nigerian government is not itself a particularly shining example of awareness or observance of the principle, except in so far as it treats all the poor people of the country from all the regions and states with equal (in)justice, (un)fairness, (in)dignity and (dis)respect!

    Five:The explosive antagonisms between integration and separatism can only be positively and beneficially resolved through rationalism, decency and fairness. But there are no guarantees that this will take place. As a matter of fact, the odds are heavily in favour of irrationalism, dogmatism and overinflated and narrowly defined self-regard. The manifestations of these traits in Nigeria at the present time are legion: we hear talk of the Yoruba or Igbo “race” where not too long ago the term referred to the three or four “races” of the Black, Brown, White and Yellow peoples of the world; there are literally thousands of “HIM” (His Imperial Majesty) in Nigeria today, this in an epoch in which virtually all the empires of the past have gone into historical oblivion; and every ethnic group in the country today is a “nation” or a “nationality”. Irrationalism in particular seems to be on amoral and psychic ascendancy that knows no bounds, from the secrecy and militant ineptitude with which Buhari’s sickness has been handled to the neo-medieval religiosity that reigns in all areas of our public sphere including those who control and run our tertiary educational institutions.

    I end on irrationalism in this first installment in the series that begins with this week’s columnfor a reason. What is this reason? Well, though rationalism does not provide any guarantees that good judgment and fairness will always prevail in the antagonism between integrationism and separatism, it is at least helpful to have it, if only in influential pockets or segments of the citizenry. This is an advice that is badly needed by both the Buhari administration and IPOB and its supporters. It will be our starting point in next week’s continuation of the series.

    Biodun Jeyifo

    bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu

  • IPOB: Lawyers seek withdrawal of charges against Kanu, others

    The lawyers defending the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, have called for termination of all the criminal charges against him.

       In a statement,  Kanu’s lawyers held that:”The 2nd and 4th defendants cannot continue to be detained on the strength of the frivolous and connected charges, in breach of their statutory guaranteed rights clearly encapsulated under chapter 4 of the constitution”

    Speaking at a press briefing, lead counsel to Kanu, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, who spoke on behalf of the team, and the indigenous people of Biafra’s general counsel said that the defendant had not committed any offence known to the law.

      ”These offences are not serious in nature by virtue of the penalty prescribed under the law creating them.”

     Ejiofor who recalled how Kanu was granted bail on some terms and conditions said:

      “It is an incontrovertible fact that orders made for Kanu’s unconditional release were disobeyed by the Federal Government, not because he has committed any offence known to law, but for their deliberate desperation to keep him behind bars in perpetuity.”

    The legal team also decried  the statement credited to the Acting President, Yemi Osinbajo, that Biafra agitation was unconstitutional.

    They held that such statement offended section two of the constitution.

    Ejiofor added:  “This declaration is respectfully considered as not only provocative, and unacceptable, but a clear case of undue interference with judicial process, which has the capacity of distorting the mindset of the judicial officer in charge of our client’s case.”

    It would be recalled that Kanu is being charged alongside three other pro-Biafra agitators- Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi.

  • IPOB disrupts aspirant’s tour in Anambra

    THE sensitization tour of the Progressive People’s Alliance (PPA) governorship aspirant in Anambra State, Mr. Godwin Ezeemo, was yesterday disrupted by youths suspected to be members of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). The disturbance took place at Odoekpe, Ogbaru Local Government Area of the state.

    Ezeemo and his team of PPA members and other supporters had gone to the local government to worship with God’s Own Pentecostal Church and interact with party faithful. The young men, brandishing Biafran flags and singing Biafran songs besieged the worship centre, asking Ezeemo and his team to desist from speaking and leave their place. “We have listened to lies for so long by these politicians and we do not need them any longer.

    “Our youths are jobless, our roads are bad. We want our freedom and we do not want all these politicians here anymore,” they chanted. However, Ezeemo was able to address the congregation, while appealing to the irate members of IPOB to keep calm. He informed them that he was a Biafran in practice, given that he brought down all his investments to his homeland. “I can understand the agitation of these youths. We have been lied to, for so long by these politicians, but I have left Britain to come back home so I can make things right.

    Just give me a chance, I will not let you down,” Ezeemo said. Despite the dancing and singing of Biafran songs by the IPOB members, there were no casualties, though the people were thrown into panic. Meanwhile, Ezeemo, had been issued with expression of interest and nomination forms to run for the upcoming gubernatorial primaries under Progressive People’s Alliance (PPA). Speaking during the handing over of the forms, the national chairman of the party, Chief Peter Ameh, said that Ezeemo had been faithful and loyal to the party since joining the party.

    He said the industrialists had been found worthy to bear the flag of the party in the upcoming Anambra State gubernatorial election, if he emerged after the party’s primary come July 22,2017. Ameh appreciated Ezeemo for his support in developing the party both at the state and national levels, while declaring him the best person to represent the interest of the party in Anambra State.

  • IPOB and election boycott

    SIR: The Biafran group has been flexing muscles in recent months with increasing popularity. The most convex moment thus far was its sit-at-home ultimatum in remembrance of those who died during the Biafran war. Though the federal government did its best to frustrate the sit-at-home exercise, the eventual mass compliance ought to appeal to every patriotic Nigerian. For the first time in a long time, there is an alternative voice to the corrupt oligarchy of the East—a voice capable of provoking the elusive political equipoise essential for effective democratic leadership in the region. How that alternative voice is deployed, moving forward, is the real gist of this piece.

    That brings us to the restated call for boycott of future elections in the Biafraland by the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). This call is obviously jejune and thus condemnable. Even the political leaders of the South-east and the South-south, most of whom have continued to exploit the Biafran crisis to avoid prosecution from corrupt practices, have responded with an extraordinary display of displeasure, attempting to smash any semblance of support for the Biafran movement that they now claim they can no longer stomach because of its tawdry approach. But anyone in his or her right frame of mind believing that the Biafran activists do not have the capacity to undermine future elections in the region is viewing the current events from a blurring rear-view mirror.

    At the same time, the leaders of the Biafran agitation must be careful not to allow the movement to be wallowed in blind ballyhoo. For sure, the South-east and South-south have experienced unimaginable history of marginalization. Too much to catalog! But what must not escape the thinking faculty of the Biafran agitators is that the real enemy is within. There is no evil perfected against the region without the active connivance of the local politicians, particularly since the advent of the Fourth Republic where the Igbo and their South-south neighbors have basked in plum political positions.

    Therefore, rather than any boycott of elections or other grandiloquent threats, the leaders of the Biafran movement can capitalize on its reigning popularity among the masses to begin to model the change envisioned under Biafra as a sovereign state. The forthcoming Anambra State election is a timely opportunity. For instance, a simple scan of the list of the major candidates currently gunning to govern Anambra State, of all places, are well-known overnight billionaires whose wealth are directly traced to looting of development projects in the area or others who see gross societal indiscipline and misconduct as a core cultural value.

    This is squarely where and when IPOB ought to step in and wield its influence towards the desired change. Instead of dwelling on past leaders or boycott of elections, this moment calls for the Biafran activists to employ all possible non-violent means to dislodge all corrupt and morally bankrupt candidates aspiring to lead Anambra State through the November 2017 elections.

    The leaders of IPOB must resist the temptation of romancing with the same corrupt politicians that are part and parcel of the problem in the first place. Plainly speaking, the Biafran agitators must not indulge in any dubious behavior that can lend credence to the swirling accusation that their struggle is no different from that of the current crop of politicians whose only aim in politics is to garner the qualifying attention to feather from any of the prime corrupt crumbs in the land.

    Like the IPOB, the ordinary Nigerian masses are against bad governance and injustice, however the shade. They are also anxiously yearning for true change in the country, and any sustained delay only goes to do more harm than good. IPOB, therefore, can gain wider support by embracing incremental change at every opportunity towards the greater good of the society while the debate for an independent state or other solutions can equally go on.

     

    • SKC Ogbonnia

    Houston, Texas, United States.

  • IPOB: I didn’t send emissary to Kanu, says Obong of Calabar

    IPOB: I didn’t send emissary to Kanu, says Obong of Calabar

    The Obong of Calabar, Edidem Ekpo Okon Abasi Otu V, yesterday denied sending any emissary to leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu.

    The Obong was reacting to a video making the rounds in the social media where a man claimed to represent him in a meeting with the IPOB leader.

    A statement by chairman of the Etuboms’ Traditional Council of the Palace of the Obong of Calabar, HRH Etubom Bassey Okor Bassey Duke, said the man claiming to represent the monarch was an “imposter with dubious intentions.”

    It reads: “The attention of the Obong of Calabar-in-Council has been drawn to a video currently making the rounds on social media in which a person is seen claiming to have been sent by the Obong of Calabar to ask Nnamdi Kanu of IPOB to visit him.

    “The content of this video is therefore a ridiculous insult and the Obong of Calabar-in-Council dissociates itself completely from everything to do with the person and fake message carried in the video.

    “From the poor illegitimate dressing, intonation, accent and comportment, it is clear that the person is a petty impersonator with dubious intentions.

    “While freedom of speech is guaranteed by the Nigerian Constitution it does not extend to endorsing the propagation of falsehood of making fraudulent claims.

    “The Obong of Calabar-in-Council, therefore calls on the security agencies to live up to expectation and immediately arrest and prosecute the impersonator whose face can clearly be seen in the video.”

    A 2:42 minute video on YouTube titled: BIAFRA: I’m very, very happy we are now a nation, shows Kanu addressing some supporters in a room when a man in dark glasses dressed in traditional attire said he brought greetings from Obong, who supports the Biafra cause and would like to see the IPOB leader.

    According to the man, the Obong and the Calabar people wanted to see the IPOB leader.

    “Tell him he was one of the people I was praying for while in prison and one of the people I would go to.

    “Tell the Obong of Calabar, I will go to see him that I would be honoured to see him in person.

    “I will come to see him in his Palace. Tell the Obong that. Thank you very much for coming,” Kanu replied in the video.

     

  • Anambra guber: Igbo leaders move to check Kanu, IPOB

    Anambra guber: Igbo leaders move to check Kanu, IPOB

    The South East political class may have drawn the battle line with the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, over his recent threat to disrupt the forthcoming governorship election in Anambra State.

    The Conference of Nigerian Political Parties (CNPP) in the zone is championing a move to cut Kanu’s influence.

    The plan, The Nation gathered, is to use political and legal means to stop Kanu and his group from preventing the conduct of the governorship election.

    Sources familiar with the development said at least three meetings have been held by political activists and parties in the zone on ensuring that nothing stops the election from taking place.

    Consequently, some political players in the zone may soon approach the court to seek an injunction restraining Kanu, IPOB or any other group or person, from acting in any manner that may jeopardize the peaceful conduct of the November 18 election in Anambra State.

    “As a group and even as individuals, we view the threat as a sad development,” one of the sources said.

    “It is unfortunate that Kanu decided to taint his agitation in such a ridiculous manner. Politicians and even the voters in the Southeast are not comfortable with such blatant display of undue arrogance. We strongly believe that the Igbo want restructuring and not secession.

    “We have met and we are still meeting. The threat is not just about Anambra, it is about the entire Southeast zone. We cannot fold our arms or leave such a thing to chance.

    “Political and legal means are being worked out to forestall any confusion before, during and after the governorship election in Anambra. We may be seeking legal injection against those threatening the election.”

    He added that as part of the political means of tackling Kanu’s threat, mass sensitisation and mobilisation of the people of Ananbra State have been suggested.

    “We have thought about reaching out to the people of Anambra and telling them about the danger of not participating in the governorship election. This may start anytime,” he added.

    This is coming on the heels of the countermand issued earlier in the week by the President of the Igbo apex socio-cultural group, Ohanaeze, Chief John Nwodo, to Kanu’s threat of election boycott in Anambra State.

    Addressing the State House of Assembly, Nwodo had said: “Whereas Ohanaeze understands the marginalisation and unfair treatment of Igbo which have given rise to self-determination movements in Igboland, leaders of these movements must not arrogate to themselves the supreme leadership of Igbo land.

    “Statement of the kind credited to Nnamdi Kanu are provocative, misleading and unproductive.  Why should Anambra people be denied the opportunity to choose their own leader? Why should any of us who are not from Anambra , no matter how highly placed, descend to the arena and dictate for Anambra people when to vote , Whether to vote or who to vote for?

    “Anambra, nay Igbo, are still part and parcel of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Yes, we are not happy with our treatment in Nigeria.  Yes, some of us want Biafra. Yes some of us prefer a restructured Federal Republic of Nigeria. But the fact remains that we are still part and parcel of the present Federal Republic of Nigeria, bound by its laws, no matter how repressive or unjust.  Our approach to reforms of our laws even if it leads to self-determination or restructuring must be lawful.

    “We must convince other Nigerians of our points of views, we must strive to make others share our concoctions.  Our language must be civil, respectful and leads to consensus building. We must resist any attempt to turn division amongst us, as to which way we must go, becoming a source of altercation between us.”

    Besides, a former National Chairman of All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Chief Victor Umeh, said the people of Anambra in particular and Igboland in general, will not be part of the “no election” threat of the IPOB leader.

    The politician urged Nigerians to disregard the threat, saying it was made in bad faith.

    He added that neither Kanu nor IPOB can prevent Igbo people anywhere from exercising their rights to vote during elections.

    “Kanu cannot prevent people from voting or seeking to be voted for. It is their civic rights. To say election will not hold is a joke. That election will come and go. For us in APGA, we take that election very seriously,” he said.

    “APGA as a political party is keen about the said election. We are approaching it with every seriousness. Nobody can tell me not to vote. He leads IPOB, not the whole of Igboland. And IPOB is just one association in the southeast. So he represents IPOB and not the entire Igbo people,” he said

    Earlier, Umeh’s party, APGA, had decried Kanu’s call on Anambra people to shun forthcoming gubernatorial poll in the state. The party, like Umeh, in a letter to Kanu, signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mr Ifeatu Obiokoye, said the call was irresponsible and devoid of intellectual focus.

    “Nnamdi Kanu’s call for a boycott of elections in the South-East, beginning with the governorship polls scheduled for Nov.18, 2017 in Anambra is irresponsible, irredentist and totally devoid of any focus. You must appreciate that for different logical reasons and perception, the Biafra concept has attracted favourable comments among our people, ostensibly borne out of the marginalisation of Ndigbo in the Nigerian state,” the party said.

    The party reminded Kanu that the right to vote and be voted for was a universally declared right under the United Nations Charter of People’s and Citizenship Right, and in the 1999 Constitution (as amended). It advised the IPOB leader to drop his “emperor” perception of himself “and humble yourself to the true leadership of Ndigbo for a proper and better articulation of the Biafra struggle”.

    The national chairman of the United Progressive Party (UPP), Chief Chekwas Okorie, also flayed Kanu and IPOB on the no-election threat in Anambra. The Abia State born politician added that the threat will soon fizzle out as nobody in the zone is willing to be part of any action that will disturb the governorship election in Anambra.

    “As far as I am concerned, it is a position that will fizzle out in due course because it is not rooted in any logic. I can excuse their naivety but it is left for elders like us to call them to order in a very subtle manner, with superior logic without being antagonistic, confrontational and unduly offensive.

    “The fact is that many of them do not know the danger of election boycott.  It is a political suicide. In the Second Republic, a political coalition, called United Progressives Grand Alliance (UPGA), led by Dr. Michael Okpara, made up NCNC, led by Okpara, Action Group (AG), then led by Dr. Majekodunmi, as Chief Obafemi Awolowo was as at that time a political prisoner and United Middle Belt Congress (UMBC), led by Joseph Tarka, and Borno Youth Forum, led by Alhaji Waziri Ibrahim.

    “You will recall that the alliance took the decision to boycott the 1965 election. That decision was a disaster because it gave the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC) and Nigerian National Alliance (NNA) the advantage they wouldn’t have had. That was why Chief Akintola, who belonged to NNA, had advantage in the West then. Of course, everyone saw the backlash of that unwise decision to boycott the election.

    “Bearing this in mind, I can assure you that the election in Anambra will be successful. Even the common Anambra people have expressed their anger at the insensitivity of the Kanu/IPOB threat against Anambra election. In fact, that threat is a major setback for IPOB,” the UPP leader said.

    Similarly, Sam Oraegbunam, Chairman of the Anambra State chapter of Hope Democratic Party (HDP), insisted that the people of the state must be allowed to peacefully vote during the scheduled governorship election to forestall a situation where the state would be left without a governor.

    “If Anambra does not hold election in Nigeria in November, it means that there will be a vacuum. And what happens to the state in terms of administration? Kanu is from a state and there is an elected governor. So he should allow us have our election because we are still a component of Nigeria,” Oraegbunam said.

     

  • Kanu not Igbo leader – Umeh

    Kanu not Igbo leader – Umeh

    A former National Chairman of All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Chief Victor Umeh, on Wednesday urged Nigerians to disregard the threats being made by the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, that the Igbos would leave the country.

    Umeh said Kanu’s comments did not reflect the opinion of people of South East.

    He described IPOB as a “mere association” with distinct agenda, adding Kanu is only a president of the association.

    The politician spoke to The Nation at the 241st Independence anniversary of the United States held at the American Consul-General residence in Ikoyi, Lagos.

    The ex-APGA chief said Kanu’s order asking people to boycott the Anambra governorship election was made in bad faith, noting that IPOB cannot prevent Anambra people from exercising their rights to choose their governor.

    He said: “Kanu cannot prevent people from exercising their civic rights. That election will come and go. For us in APGA, we take that election very seriously.

    “Kanu cannot direct me not to vote. Kanu is a leader of IPOB, a mere association. IPOB is not an umbrella body of all Igbo people. Kanu represents an association that chose to go by that name. That is what it is.

    “The Igbo are not asking for secession. What we are asking for is equity and fairness in the running of the country.”

    The politician said restructuring would bring about peace in the country, stressing that Nigeria would not disintegrate if it restructures.

    He said people who are afraid of restructuring are the real enemies of the country.

    Also, two Yoruba monarchs at the event cautioned people beating the war drum.

    The Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Lamidi Adeyemi, and Oba of Lagos, Oba Rilwan Akiolu, advised those calling for secession to desist from their activities.

    They said the nation’s unity is non-negotiable.

    Oba Adeyemi said: “I urge people calling for the breakup of our country to be cautious of their utterances. We don’t want another war. We are brought together by fate and we must not dismember the country because of parochial interest. We should continue to tolerate one another.”

  • IPOB members will boycott Anambra, 2019 elections if … – Kanu

    IPOB members will boycott Anambra, 2019 elections if … – Kanu

    The Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, warned on Wednesday his members and other eligible voters in Anambra State would boycott the state gubernatorial election slated for November if the Federal Government fails to hold referendum before the election.

    Kanu, who spoke at his father’s palace in Afara Ukwu Ibeku, Umuahia, Abia State, added that people of Southeast and others under the Old Eastern Region would not participate in the 2019 general election if the government ignores the demand for referendum.

    He also faulted his exclusion from the ongoing stakeholders meeting in Aso Rock, saying he would not relent in his agitation for Biafra.

    The IPOB leader said: “Nigerian government should build as many prisons as possible to jail all Biafrans because there is no going back and we are ready to go there (prisons) unless the federal government gives us Biafra.

    “We are starting with Anambra come November this year. There will be no governorship election in Anambra State. In 2019, the whole of Biafra land will not vote for any President. There will be no Senator, there will be no House of Reps, there will be no House of Assembly and there will be no councillorship elections in Biafra land if they (federal government) fail to call for a referendum.”

    He urged his members to remain steadfast and calm as Biafra remains their only hope.

    “We are not like any other people. People like us don’t come twice. That’s why I know that with the last breath in this very body that Biafra will be restored. There’s nothing anybody can do about it. Tell them that’s what I said. Nobody on this earth can stop Biafra,” he added.