Tag: Nnamdi Kanu

  • UPDATED: Court strikes out Nnamdi Kanu’s motion seeking relocation from Sokoto prison 

    UPDATED: Court strikes out Nnamdi Kanu’s motion seeking relocation from Sokoto prison 

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out the motion ex-parte filed by convicted self acclaimed leader the proscribed separatist group the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu seeking to be relocated from the Sokoto prison where he is currently being held.

    Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling on Tuesday, held that not only was the motion incompetent, Kanu failed to comply with the order made by the court on December 8, 2025 that he should convert motion ex-parte to a motion on notice and serve it on those to by affected by the order to be made by the court.

    Justice Omotosho said: “In respect of the application before this court, it has to do with an application that was brought incompetently as par seeking for the movements of the convict from where he is presently kept. 

    “The application is not competent. However in the interest of justice, when it came up, the court gave hint and urged that, that same be converted, in other words, telling the applicant to go and file motion on notice. 

    “The applicant, having not filed the motion on notice today, the 27th day of January, 2026, there is no any application for determination before this court. 

    “It is based on this that the motion ex-parte is struck out as there is nothing to be determined,” Justice Omotosho said.

    Earlier, when the case was called, the judge asked the registrar to confirm the service of the process and hearing notice on the respondents (FG and NCos).

    The registrar told the court that there was no proof of service of the motion on notice and hearing notice on the respondents.

    A lawyer from the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON), Demdoo Asan, who appeared for Kanu, said that although the court had on the last adjourned date directed that the motion be served on the respondents, he has been unable to do so.

    Read Also: Court strikes out Nnamdi Kanu’s motion seeking relocation from Sokoto prison

    Asan said he has not seen Kanu’s relatives since they last attended court, adding that efforts to get them to come to his office so that they could sign court papers failed

    He said: “They kept saying they will get back to me and that wasn’t done. 

    “My lord, that has been the reason counsel could not filed the motion on notice because counsel cannot depose to that affidavit personally.” 

    The lawyer said the second reason  why he could not file and serve the respondents was that Kanu had sought to dictate to him how to handle the case.

    Asan cited Order 50, Rule 1 of the Federal High Court Rules, therefore and applied to the court to be allowed to withdraw from further representing Kanu, an application the judge granted.

  • Court strikes out Nnamdi Kanu’s motion seeking relocation from Sokoto prison

    Court strikes out Nnamdi Kanu’s motion seeking relocation from Sokoto prison

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out the motion ex parte filed by the convicted self-acclaimed leader of the proscribed separatist group, the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, seeking to be relocated from the Sokoto prison where he is currently being held.

    Justice James Omotosho, in a ruling on Tuesday, held that not only was the motion incompetent, but Kanu also failed to comply with the order made by the court on December 8, 2025, that he should convert the motion ex parte to a motion on notice and serve it on those to be affected by the order to be made by the court.

    Justice Omotosho said: “In respect of the application before this court, it has to do with an application that was brought incompetently, as per seeking the movements of the convict from where he is presently kept.

    Read Also: Nnamdi Kanu, Omotosho and the rule of law

    “The application is not competent. However, in the interest of justice, when it came up, the court gave a hint and urged that the same be converted, in other words, telling the applicant to go and file a motion on notice.

    “The applicant, having not filed the motion on notice today, the 27th day of January, 2026, there is no application for determination before this court.

    “It is based on this that the motion ex parte is struck out as there is nothing to be determined.”

    Details shortly…

  • Nnamdi Kanu’s incarceration and the Igbo blame game

    Nnamdi Kanu’s incarceration and the Igbo blame game

    Sir: Many Igbo believe that the incarceration of Nnamdi Kanu is a confirmation of the implacable hatred for the Igbo by the Hausa/Fulani and Yoruba. They want people to believe that his sentence to life imprisonment by a Yoruba High Court judge, Kolawale Omotosho, is a betrayal of the Igbo by yet another Yoruba. In some write-ups, some Igbo have likened it to an earlier betrayal of Emeka Ojukwu and the Igbo by a Yoruba: Obafemi Awolowo. 

    Awolowo did not betray Ojukwu. Ojukwu did not release him from prison, and thus, had no agreement or understanding with him. It was Yakubu Gowon that released Awolowo from jail. Gowon came to power on August 1, 1966. The next day, August 2, 1966, he released political prisoners, including Awolowo, Tony Enahoro, Joseph Tarka and Lateef Jakande.

    Saro Wiwo and the ethnic minorities of Eastern Region/Biafra were not saboteurs; they did not betray the Igbo. How can you betray a cause you had, from the outset, refused to be part of?

    Due to their fear of domination by a dominant ethnic group, ethnic minorities across Nigeria are ardent proponents of one Nigeria. In their fear of Hausa/Fulani domination, the minorities in northern Nigeria are fervent aficionados of one Nigeria. The one time Nigerian Defence Minister, Domkat Bali, once succinctly expressed this fear of Hausa/Fulani domination and his commitment to Nigerian unity. “I am from a small tribe, the Tarok tribe in Langtang. If the North secures its independence from Nigeria, the Hausa/Fulani will be so dominant that they will lord it over us whether we like it or not. A bigger Nigeria will check such excesses. So, the bigger Nigeria is, the freer my tribe and I will be.”

    In their fear of Yoruba domination, the minorities of Western Region, Igbo, Edo, Ishan, Urhobo, etc., agitated for, and got, their own region, the Midwestern Region. In their fear of Igbo domination, those in Eastern Region, Efik, Ogoja, Ijaw, etc, for long, demanded their own region/state from Eastern Region.

    In his book, Sunset in Biafra, Elechi Amadi wrote about being a member of the Rivers people delegation that met with Ojukwu in Enugu on September 2, 1966. In the meeting, they made it clear that, “The only lasting solution would be the creation of a Rivers State”. In other words, they stated their desire to remain in Nigeria and have a state of their own, Rivers State. Unequivocally, they stated their refusal to be part of Biafra. Ojukwu ignored their stance and forced them into his Biafra.

    Read Also: NGF names Yobe best performing state in primary health care delivery

    As the war raged, the absurdity and futility of Biafra became even more glaring. Thus, scapegoats were needed to bear the blame for Ojukwu’s reckless choices, blunders and failures in leadership. As the generality of them had made it clear that they did not want to be part of Biafra, the minorities became ready targets for alleged saboteurs. The Biafran authorities encouraged or, at least, acquiesced to their mass-murder by Igbo soldiers and villagers for alleged perfidy and sabotage. This inspired deep anti-Igbo sentiments amongst them. Not surprisingly, at the end of the war, they seized Igbo property in Port Harcourt and refused the return of the Igbo to the city.

    Amazingly, there was no saboteur in Biafra; it was merely a propaganda spoof that, in addition to the minorities, targeted educated and independent-minded Igbo that disagreed with Ojukwu’s policies and methods, like Emmanuel Ifeajuna. In their individual books, the Chief of Staff of the Biafran Army, Alexander Madiebo; the 2nd in command in the Banjo-led Midwest Expeditionary Force, Wale Ademoyega; the Chief of Biafran Military Intelligence, Bernard Odogwu; and Ojukwu’s chief apologist and master propagandist, Frederick Forsyth, attested that there was no saboteur in Biafra; and that Emmanuel Ifeajuna was not a saboteur.

    The imprisonment of Nnamddi Kanu is not a betrayal of the Igbo by the Yoruba. It does not evince Hausa/Fulani and Yoruba hatred for Ndigbo. Nnamdi Kanu is a trouble maker that was to inevitably get into trouble. He is a delusional messiah and pseudo-freedom fighter. In his confused and twisted form of freedom fighting, he directs his guns and terror not against the enemy, but against his own people. Thus, he brought death, dread and disorder to the once placid Igbo land.

    The perplexing question is how can the terrorizing of Ndigbo and the devastation of Alaigbo by Kanu’s private armies and their criminal shoot-offs translate to the realization of Biafra?

    •Tochukwu Ezukanma,Lagos.

  • Nnamdi Kanu, Omotosho and the rule of law

    Nnamdi Kanu, Omotosho and the rule of law

    Sir: Now that Nnamdi Kanu has been sentenced, we can see clearly that the sky did not fall. The most beautiful thing is that this is a big win for the rule of law in our democratic setting. Keeping him for so long gave the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) proponents a measure of legitimacy that they did not deserve. We must learn and prepare our courts to handle thorny and vexatious cases. The more we try these people, who are on the lunatic fringe of society, the more we have a clearer definition of who we are as a people.

    Throughout my writings, I have emphasized the rule of law as the pinnacle of our democratic society. The failure to try criminals leads to a culture of nihilism, vigilante justice and anarchy.

    We must build more prisons and update our criminal justice system. We must not allow criminals living on the fringes of our society to determine our ethos. Rule of law and justice must go hand in hand. One of the most puzzling things that troubled me is the way the proponents of Biafra were asking for a criminal to be freed without trial. Some trivialized the sins of Nnamdi as political as such; he should be set free using political methods to set a criminal free.

    Some even argued that there is nothing he has done that other people have not done. They used yellow journalism to tell us that Boko Haram members are being recruited into the Nigerian Army.

    The Biafrans were attempting to amputate justice by agitating for Kanu to be freed without trial.

    I sincerely believe that in Nigeria, all criminals should have their day in court. Calling it a political case does not make it less criminal.

    In politics, we are expected to disagree with each other on issues. The moment you slap someone due to this disagreement, you have left the realm of politics into criminality and you should be prosecuted for criminal assault. Politics is not a criminal enterprise even when unruly politicians use criminal methods to gain ascendency. It is this misrepresentation that made a swath of Southeast politicians to agitate for the release of a criminal without trial.

    Read Also: Akinnadewo urges Christian, Nigerian leaders to deepen humanitarian efforts

    Why didn’t they appeal to Norway to free Simon Ekpa on political grounds? At the end of the day, Nnamdi Kanu who was giving orders to summarily execute people had a fair trial that was denied to his victims.

    We must jettison the temptation to deny citizens of due process. We may not be happy with the outcome but that is not a reason to impugn the integrity of the judge. The right thing to do is to appeal the case. At the post mortem, one of Nnamdi’s lawyers regaled us with Nnamdi’s knowledge of the law. He said Nnamdi knows more law than the lawyers and the judge.

    Here we go again with stupid braggadocio. What is the knowledge of the law if you have no respect for our courts and the presiding judge? In what universe do these Biafrans exist? How come these Biafrans are so gullible that they will take the hallucinations of a sick person as ordained truth?

    I will advise them to plead that their client is impaired by reason of insanity instead of questioning this judgment which was based on sound legal reasoning.

    Court proceedings are public records. Those in doubt should get a copy of the transcript of the judgement instead of substituting their emotional tantrum for sound legal reasoning.

    •Dr Austin Orette, Houston, Texas, United States

  • Kanu: Igbo groups question UK

    Kanu: Igbo groups question UK

    Pursuant to the Nnamdi Kanu affair, an amalgamation of Igbo diaspora groups has condemned the indifference of the United Kingdom (UK) to the trial and jailing of the controversial IPOB leader. Mr Kanu, they reminded the UK government, holds a British passport in addition to being a Nigerian. As the groups put it: “A British passport holder was abducted from Kenya without legal extradition, subjected to a sham trial under a repealed law, and sentenced to life imprisonment; yet London remains silent…This silence is deeply troubling and undermines the credibility of the UK as a global human rights champion… But when a British citizen faces unlawful detention and a life sentence, the government’s indifference is deafening. Silence here reads as complicity.”

    READ ALSO: Benin Republic demons

    All this is just emotional bilge water. Mr Kanu does not hold a British passport only to merit the intervention of the UK. In this case, and given the nature of the charges, he is also Nigerian. Which one, in the estimation of the British, should supersede the other? Terrorism, everyone now understands, is a grave subject that neither the British nor any other serious country would fool around with. The groups idolise Mr Kanu. Good for them. But they should have restrained him during his wild days of inciting his supporters to mayhem. Blaming the British or accusing them of passivity in the groups’ misreading of the situation and ignorance of the law will not change anything or give freedom to the jailed ‘freedom fighter’.

  • Transfer request: Court orders Nnamdi Kanu to serve motion on Fed Govt, NCoS

    Transfer request: Court orders Nnamdi Kanu to serve motion on Fed Govt, NCoS

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the convicted leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, to serve the Federal Government and the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) his motion seeking to be transferred from the Sokoto Prison.

    In a ruling yesterday, Justice James Omotosho declined to grant the motion ex parte Kanu filed, but ordered him to serve the Federal Government and the NCoS to enable them respond accordingly.

    Kanu, in the motion ex parte, prayed for “an order compelling the complainant (Federal Government) and/or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) to forthwith transfer him from the Sokoto Correctional Facility to a custodial facility within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court”.

    Alternatively, he sought an order transferring him to the court’s “immediate environs, such as the Suleja or the Keffi Custodial Centre, for the purpose of enabling the applicant (Kanu) to effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal”.

    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, Kanu’s lawyer, Demdoo Asan from the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON), moved the ex parte motion.

    Justice Omotosho drew Asan’s attention to the first prayer in the motion, which is for an order “compelling” the Federal Government and NCoS to transfer the convict to a correctional facility that is close to the jurisdiction of the court.

    The judge asked Asan if he would like to insist on the first prayer, particularly as it relates to the word: “compel” used in the ex parte motion.

    Justice Omotosho also asked Asan if the prosecution and the NCoS, in whose custody Kanu is currently being kept, ought to be served with the motion or not.

    The judge added: “You are from Legal Aid Council, counsel? Do you think it is by ex parte motion that this application ought to be granted, having it in mind that judgment was delivered when the two parties were present?

    “Also, among the respondents to obey the order is the Correctional Service, and you think it is through ex parte motion that the court can make the order for his transfer?

    Read Also: Osimhen wants Onyedika at Galatasaray

    “Don’t you think this application should have come by motion on notice?” the judge asked.

    Responding, Asan admitted that the respondents (prosecution and the NCoS) ought to be put on notice to enable them to respond.

    The lawyer added: “My lord, the respondents have the right to be heard. Usually, the court can make an order that they should be put on notice.”

    Asan said he agreed with the judge’s observation that the respondents should be heard and that the motion ex parte could not be taken now.

    He added: “They (the respondents) should be heard. We will be applying that the complainant and other parties involved should be put on notice.”

    Ruling, Justice Omotosho struck out the first prayer in Kanu’s motion ex parte, as requested by his lawyer.

    The judge then ordered that the prosecution and the NCoS be served with the motion for them to respond in the interest of justice.

    He faulted the notice of appeal, which Kanu filed on November 10, before the court’s November 20 judgment, which convicted him and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

    Justice Omotosho held that, based on the judgment delivered by his court on November 20, there is currently no notice of appeal before his court.

    He adjourned till January 27, next year, to enable Kanu serve the prosecution and the NCoS, as ordered by the court and for the motion to be heard.

  • Unlocking the Kanu logjam

    Unlocking the Kanu logjam

    •Apparently, legal justice is not enough to restore peace to the South East

    Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, now a celebrity of sorts, is such a complex personality. Among the Igbo people of the South East region, he is either a hero (to his followers and friends) or a villain to the millions who have suffered the loss of limbs and property. Others are so bitter about him that a mention of the ñame could make those who have lost family or relations throw up.

    When Justice Kolawole Omotoso of the Federal High Çourt, Abuja finally delivered the judgment in the seven count charge preferred against him by the Department of State Services, the matter further divided the country. Beyond his kith and kin in the East, most people in other parts of the country where he had courted enemies by his caustic broadcasts on the illegal Radio Biafra channel were predominantly pleased that he got what he deserved. Some even, as the prosecution led by Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, canvassed, felt he deserved the ultimate senence-death.

    However, the case against Kanu, leader of the separatist Indigenous People of Biafra, is not that straightforward. Yes, on November 20 he had his day before the Court of Justice, it is obvious that what he got was just legal justice, which no one could fault, but the broader matter of social and political justice is still hanging, waiting for resolution.

    Ideological and philosophical matters are hardly settled and not simply determined using the law of the land. In countries like the United Kingdom where the Irish Republican Army raged for decades and thousands were killed, the conflict could not be resolved by the many convictions of the zealots secured in the law courts.

    In South Africa where the white supremacists had imposed the apartheid system, peace could not be restored until both sides, the blacks and whites negotiated the way forward. It is obvious that more than five decades after the civil war was lost and won, the people of the region continue to nurse a breakaway impulse for the region from Nigeria, and irrespective of whatever a figure like Kanu could have done to hurt the people, many of them still blame it on the Nigerian state. More than other parts of the country, words like marginalisation are thrown around more among Ndigbo. According to the law of the land, Kanu still has the opportunity of appealing the Omotoso verdict, but legal minds have argued that he stands little chance of being freed in the higher courts. One, because evidence adduced against him was so weighty that hardly could any judge have found him a lacuna for freedom.

    Second, because he muddled up his case by his mannerism in court that is so documented by the trial judge, and his dismissal of his lawyers, including such members of the inner bar like Kanu Agabi, SAN, a former Attorney General of the Federation and the respected Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN. The shabby treatment he gave his counsel right in court tended to support the charges against him as it suggests he is a violent man. He literally refused to submit to the authority of the court trying him. Third, some of those who could have pleaded his cause have been pushed away.

    The question that should bother all is: what is the way forward? There is no doubt that men of the uniform are hurt, deeply hurt. They lost so many men, equipment and limbs. The social schism in the country has become deeper by the activities of IPOB and Eastern Security Network, its violent wing, both established and run by Kanu’s men. Certainly no government would easily gloss over the feeling of the armed forces and other security forces. Yet, the logjam must be broken, somehow.

    Nnamdi Kanu is locked away in the Sokoto correctional centre, the heart of the caliphate that he had so vigorously campaigned against, and on which he chose to hang the travails of his people. A lot would depend on President Bola Tinubu to find political solution that would assuage the feelings of all involved. The first step to finding an out-of-court settlement to the conflict is for Nnamdi Kanu to be willing to make critical concessions. So far, he is yet to display remorse or convince the state that he would be willing to embrace peaceful conduct. To be released and bring an end to the apartheid regime, the venerable Nelson Mandela agreed to drop violent protest and lead the African National Congress into cooperating with the state, even after he had been in jail for 27 years.

    The Igbo leaders must be involved and ensure that a more moderate leader emerges. It does not appear that Nnamdi Kanu has the temperament to drive the process. How could he be persuaded to step aside or assume a less prominent position? How would they all accept the minimum conditions put forward by the government? What concessions would the federal government come up with? What role would leaders of the other regions play in resolving the conflict?

    Read Also: ‘Provide evidence of corruption among judges,’ Appeal Court’s president tasks Nigerians

    The international community may have to play some part in the same way that organisations like the Red Cross and the United Nations played in similar situations in other countries. If Israel and Hamas could negotiate through third parties, Nigeria would have to explore means of finding peace. At a time when the Northern parts of the country are boiling, we have to ensure that we secure the whole of the South. There is no doubt that bringing the East on board could be more difficult than the procedure adopted to bringing peace to the Niger Delta under the Jonathan administration. The Biafran Spirit has been on for so many decades and even children who were yet unborn by 1970 when the war ended have imbibed the ideology. This would therefore necessitate getting the diplomatic expertise of persons who had participated in such negotiations to drive the process.

    The ball is in the court of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. He has to show that he is willing to cooperate with the governors of the East for whom he had little respect, and the leadership of the Ohanaeze Ndigbo. Nigeria must move forward. To develop, the tempest in the various parts of the country has to subside. In the East, freedom for Kanu has become necessary, but it has to be at a cost. The haemorrhage must stop. This includes economic haemorrhage that came from the shutdown on Mondays. The Igbo people are industrious traders and businessmen and should be free to transact their businesses in accordance with the laws of the land.

    Truly, all hands must be on deck.

  • Request for transfer: Court orders Nnamdi Kanu to serve motion on FG, prison service

    Request for transfer: Court orders Nnamdi Kanu to serve motion on FG, prison service

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered convicted leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu to serve on the Federal Government and the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) his motion seeking to be transferred from the Sokoto prison.

    In a ruling on Monday, Justice James Omotosho declined to grant the motion ex-parte Kanu filed, but instead, ordered him to serve the Fed Govt and the NCoS to enable them responded accordingly.

    Kanu, in the motion ex-parte prayed for “an order compelling the complainant (Federal Government)!and/or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) to forthwith transfer him from the Sokoto Correctional Facility to a custodial facility within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.”

    Alternately, he sought an order transferring him to the court’s “immediate environs, such as the Suleja or the Keffi Custodial Centre, for the purpose of enabling the applicant (Kanu) to effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.”

    At the commencement of proceedings on Monday, Kanu’s lawyer, Demdoo Asan from the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON) moved the ex-parte motion.

    Justice Omotosho then drew Asan’s attention of to the first prayer in the motion ex-parte, which is for an order “compelling” the Federal Government and NCoS to transfer the convict to a correctional facility that is close to the jurisdiction of the court.

    The judge asked Asan if he would like to insist on the first prayer particularly as it relates to the word: “compel” used in the ex-parte motion.

    Justice Omotosho equally asked Asan if the prosecution and the NCoS, in whose custody Kanu’s is currently being kept, ought to be served with the motion or not.

    The judge added, “You are from Legal Aid Council counsel? Do you think it is by ex-parte motion this application ought to be granted, having it in mind that judgment was delivered when the two parties were present?

    “Also, among the respondents to obey the order is the correctional service and you think it is through ex-parte motion that the court can make the order for his transfer?

    “Don’t you think this application should have come by motion on notice,” the judge asked.

    Responding, Asan admitted that the respondents (prosecution and the NCoS) ought to be put on notice to enable them respond.

    Asan added, “My lord, the respondents have the right to be heard. Usually, the court can make an order that they should be put on notice.” 

    The lawyer said he agree with the judge’s observation that the respondents should be heard and that the motion ex-parte could not be taken now.

    Asan said, “They (the respondents) should be heard. We will be applying that the complainant and other parties involved should be put on notice.

    Ruling, Justice Omotosho struck out the first prayer in Kanu’s motion ex-parte, as requested by his lawyer.

    The judge then ordered that the prosecution and the NCoS be served with the motion for them to respond in the interest of justice. 

    He faulted the notice of appeal which Kanu filed on November 10 before the court’s November 20 judgment, which convicted him and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

    Justice Omotosho said based on the judgment delivered by his court on November 20, there is no notice of appeal before his court.

    He then adjourned till January 27, 2026 to enable the Kanu serve the prosecution and NCoS as ordered by the court and for the motion to be heard.

  • JUST IN: Court rejects Nnamdi Kanu’s request to be transferred from Sokoto prison

    JUST IN: Court rejects Nnamdi Kanu’s request to be transferred from Sokoto prison

    The Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected an application filed by the IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu, seeking his transfer from the Sokoto Correctional Centre to a custodial facility within the Federal Capital Territory or neighbouring Nasarawa State.

    Kanu, through the Legal Aid Council, had approached the court with an ex-parte application requesting an order directing the Federal Government or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) to immediately move him from Sokoto to either Kuje Custodial Centre in Abuja or Keffi Custodial Centre in Nasarawa.

    In the alternative, he asked to be transferred to any custodial facility within the court’s jurisdiction, including Suleja or Keffi, to enable him to effectively pursue his appeal.

    Read Also: The miracle of Nnamdi Kanu

    However, Justice James Omotosho on Monday declined the request, ruling that such an order could not be granted without hearing from the Federal Government.

    The judge directed Kanu to convert the ex-parte application into a motion on notice and serve all parties to allow fair hearing.

    Justice Omotosho subsequently fixed January 27, 2026, for the hearing of the motion.

    Details shortly…

  • The miracle of Nnamdi Kanu

    The miracle of Nnamdi Kanu

    I have had some time to ponder the staying power of Nnamdi Kanu, whom I had at several moments described as an ethnic entrepreneur. I stopped calling him that long ago because he has transfigured into something higher: a genius.

    I do not mean, by this assertion, that the jailbird in Sokoto is now a sublime act. But he is a beautiful subject of study.

    What intrigues me is that he belongs to a group that swears and acts with blood and death. If his followers are just the street gang, the rough-hewn ragamuffins and the men with blood in their eyes, he would not inspire this essay.

    But what concerns me is that he has the sympathy, I dare say, the following of some of the polished and intelligent citizens of the east. After all, when the authorities threw him to the edge of the northwest, the first major guest is a man of culture and commerce, and a man of democracy, a man of Nigerian confession. Alex Otti, the governor of Abia State , where Kanu hails from, paid him a call.

    Even if Otti does not legitimate Kanu’s subversion, he is negotiating with it. He would not have visited if he did not carry with him the nod of his class in the east. By his class, I mean the Igbo intelligentsia, business, cultural and political elite. He walked into that jailhouse with the halo of the Igbo pride. He shook Kanu’s hands with the soul of his people.

    Yet, when you ask the most peace-loving of the Igbos, they would say they abhor the acts of the IPOB group. And they say it with all sincerity. The Monday paralysis in the east punctures the chief business of the Igbo people, which is business. So, none of them would like what his group is doing.

    Yet, before the day of verdict, some lawmakers from the east wanted to preempt Justice Omotosho’s judgment by asking for his release, and some form of out-of-court settlement.

    What all this means is that, from top to bottom with some exceptions, the Igbo head may not always be with Kanu. But their heart is with him.

    Read Also: ‘How Nigeria helped foil military coup in Benin Republic’

    This was the fellow that said openly that Lagos should be burned down. He called Nigeria a zoo. He tried to deligitimise the governors in the Southeast. He opened a war room during EndSars where he was directing his foot soldiers to burn and destroy. He impugned Peter Obi, the beloved of the Obidients, by railing at his sexuality. Ironically, his followers form the core of Obi’s followers.

    In spite of the visits and negotiations of the top men in the east, Kanu has not shifted one ground. He is not ready to foreswear Biafra. He is not ready to accept Nigeria. Has anyone asked how he has gathered senior advocates to defend him in court. Are they doing it for free? Of course not. SANs do not accept pittance to appear in court. Without pretty penny, there is no appearance.

    Who is funding them? Street gangs cannot afford a SAN. No one has come out to tell us who the sponsors may be. If the lawyers are doing it for free, does that not add to Kanu’s mystique? He was not even a nice man to his lawyers. He openly insulted them, and he even threatened to fire them. Eventually, he did. Kanu has no resources for a court trial.

    Why, then, would the Igbo elite sympathise with him? It is because the sentiment of Biafra is alive and well. It is not a goal in most of their hearts. It is a treasure. It has moved from a lived reality in the 1960’s when the war was fought with bloodshed and destructions and miscalculations and blunders that led to its collapse.

    The elite who even fought in the war would tell you it was not a pleasant experience and they would not want to go through it again. When I was researching my novel, My Name is Okoro, I gathered this much from those who passed through its crucible.

    But man is a creature of sentiment, not reason, said Oscar Wilde. Biafra still lives in the hearts of many Igbos, whether a professor or a roadside mechanic. Kanu has shown for them a courage that is pristine. He is their diamond in the rough. They can live with the rough, so long as it cherishes the diamond inside. In fact, the rough is a protector layer for the lustre within.

    On the surface you would think that what Biafrans should fight for is justice. Justice may mean, even within today’s system, a fair shake in the polity. That would mean an Igbo president, good roads, better schools and education, peace and prosperity. In the days of Jonathan, the Igbo elite appropriated the Ijaw as Azikiwe, and Jonathan saw his opportunity to vouchsafed them his Ijaw heart. But all they wanted and got were positions as ministers and director generals and contracts.

    When Buhari came and gave them the best infrastructure ever under Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN), the story gained traction that it was Jonathan’s legacy. Thanks but no thanks. If Kanu recants his position today and renounces his Biafran stance, majority of Igbos will be disappointed.

    You can call him a ruffian, an anarchist, a hopeless irridentist, to most Igbo the man is a treasure. He may be stronger than an ideologue. Ideologues have a set of ideas about society and future. He has none. He is more of a utopian, like the spirit of a millenarian. That utopia is Biafra. Utopias are dreams, like soap bubbles. But they are delicate fantasies for which bloodsheds are deemed necessary. Although Machiavelli says ideologies covet violence, Kanu knows ideology limits him. He would rather gulp something that is at once simple and elusive. He has grown into a sort of charisma, like the fellow in Nobel prize novel The Books of Jacob by Olga Tokarczuk.

    In that sense, Kanu is not an ideologue of justice. He is a miracle. Dostoyevsky wrote about the three features that entrap a people: mystery, authority and miracle. Kanu has embodied all of them by insisting on the purity of the Biafran idea, and that in itself is worth all the bloodshed, all the fear and trembling on the streets in the southeast. It forgives his foul rhetoric. His admirers would not want the poverty he is causing in the east, but they would not want to compromise him or want him compromised. In a sense, being in jail is Kanu’s ultimate sacrifice for his people. He will not shift his ground, and the courts would not shift for him.

    They will not want him to go the way of Ojukwu, who had to leave Ivory Coast and sup with his conquerors in the National Party of Nigeria, the same people who saw Ojukwu humiliated a second time when he lost his Senate bid. Ojukwu lost his purity. They do not want that for the new Ojukwu. This Ojukwu bears no sword, commands no brigade, but holds something more potent: an idea. A sentiment.

    If the Igbo love their business, they love Biafra more. Before business is the Igbo soul, and Kanu encases it even when he is a boor. Man shall not live by bread alone. As I stated, men never go to war for bread. There is no bread martyr in history.  That is why I say Kanu, for them, is a miracle. The intelligentsia would not want to come out to condemn his acts. The sentiment is too strong. They remind one of the scene in Chigozie Obioma’s novel, The Road to the Country. As the war ends, some federal soldiers coerce some Igbos to shout One Nigeria, but an old woman, once the soldiers are out of earshot, yells “hail Biafra.” In Chimamanda Adichie’s  Half of a Yellow Sun, when the people are fleeing towns and villages, a woman insists she is not going to leave her home. Her home is inviolate, even on pain of death. That is what Kanu symbolises.

     Those who say they can negotiate with Kanu are in a dance. The Sokoto jailbird is the choreographer, and the choir as well as the audience want the tune to continue. They can finetune it, but not to stop it. the choreographer is a genius

    It creates a dilemma for them. They want peace, but they love, at least admire, Kanu, even if they cannot say it in public. Discussing it is like touching a sacred grove. The Igbos, from top to bottom, love Nigeria so much that they would not want to leave. Hence, when Ojukwu declared Biafra, he was not satisfied until he conquered all of Nigeria, and headed to Lagos. Hence when he died, I called him Omo Eko on this page. I told a journalist the other day that if Biafra is declared today, the next day Igbos will line up for Nigerian visa. She replied it was true and they like it that way. Biafra is a like a virgin. She must not wed.