Edoziem group suspends Nnamdi Kanu, IPOB rejects move

SKAiF NewsNG SNN SKAiF NewsNG SNN
Jun 19, 2026 - 12:00
0 0
Kanu raises alarm, alleges tricks by FG to perpetually hold him down Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has drawn attention to what he described as serial executive and judicial fraud being perpetrated against him since his extraordinary rendition in 2021. In an open letter addressed to Nigerians yesterday, Kanu said: ‘’In a judgment entered on March 1, 2017, the Federal High Court, Abuja, ruled that the ‘IPOB is not an unlawful group’. At the time, it received widespread publicity which can be verified. ‘’This landmark ruling (made by the court before it turned unjust) emanated in a criminal proceedings that required ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’ and in which the federal government and my humble self presented our respective cases. ‘’Alas! Instead of the federal government to go on appeal as the law mandated (if they are dissatisfied with the judgment), the former Attorney-General (Abubakar Malami) went behind closed doors with a letter signed by late Abba Kyari and got IPOB proscribed/tagged a terrorist group in an ex parte proceedings that conducted without notice to me or to the IPOB. ‘’This abominable incident was the earliest sign yet that the government and its judiciary have struck an unholy and fraudulent alliance to deny me my rights and thereby imperil the life and liberty of millions who identity with IPOB. ‘’On October 26, 2022, a Federal High Court declared my extraordinary rendition and detention as unconstitutional, stating that: ‘the manner of arrest and detention of the Applicant (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu) in Kenya, his continued detention in Abuja, his subjection to physical and mental trauma by the Respondents, the inhuman and degrading treatment meted out to the Applicant amounts to a brazen violation of the Applicant’s fundamental right to dignity of his person and threat to life under Section 34 (1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).’ ‘’The court further ordered the federal government to apologize to me and pay me compensation. In a responsible society and well-ordered, run by a responsible government, this judgment is sufficient to have ended my lengthy detention and encourage the federal government to constructively engage me on the issue of the self-determination agitation that triggered this whole saga. ‘’Pedal back to October 13, 2022, when the Court of Appeal held that: ‘The courts must never shy away from calling the executive to order when they resort to acts of ‘executive lawlessness.’ ‘’The duty of the courts is to maintain a balance between ensuring that law and order is obeyed and the protection of the individual from oppressive actions by the executive. ‘’By the forcible abduction and extraordinary rendition of the Appellant (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu) from Kenya to this country on the 27th day of June 2021, in violation of international and state laws, the lower court or, indeed, any court in this country is divested of jurisdiction to entertain charges against the Appellant’. ‘’Despite the clarity of this judgment and its comportment with reason, the federal government refused to release me from detention while it went behind closed doors and connived with three other justices of the court of appeal who fraudulently and swiftly sat on appeal over the judgment and practically destroyed it by issuing what they termed ‘a stay of execution’. ‘’One may then ask: Is it not abominable for a court to stay a judgment the government already disobeyed? In a plethora of cases, the Supreme Court has held that anybody who disobeys a related court order cannot be given any judicial relief until such order is obeyed. ‘’This is a sound reasoning that applied to everybody but is fraudulently overlooked when it comes to my case. Fast forward to 15th December 2023 when the Supreme Court sent back my case to the Federal High Court for trial. ‘’For avoidance of doubt, that was not the only decision the Supreme Court made. It also decided that my bail should not have been revoked and it went on to state clearly that the judge exhibited significant and unacceptable bias by revoking my bail. ‘’In a sane society, one would expect that when the High court received my case from the Supreme Court and hankered down for trial, it was also duty-bound to restore my bail in line with the pronouncement of the apex court. ‘’But that did not happen. Why? Well, your guess is as good as mine and that is: the Court connived with the federal government to continue my detention in violation of Section 287 of the Nigerian Constitution. ‘’On September 24, 2024, I decided that I have had enough of taking my chances at getting justice from a judge that, in June 2021, sent me to secret police detention without fair hearing, later refused to transfer me to prison to better prepare for my trial and capped it all by refusing to restore my bail and instead ordering an accelerated trial in the face of the reality that I will never get a fair trial whilst detained at the DSS. ‘’These are the major reasons that compelled me to request recusal of the judge and having consented to it, she proceeded to make an order removing herself from my case. That order was never challenged on appeal; thus it remains extant to this day. ‘’But instead of the Chief judge of the Federal High Court to do the lawful thing by assigning my case to another judge, he connived with the federal government to eat crow and send my case to a judge that stands recused by a valid order. ‘’To conclude this open letter, let me make it clear that it should in no way be construed to mean that there are no decent judges in Nigeria that can be trusted to deliver even-handed justice in my case. That is not the issue. ‘’Instead, the issue is that my case is deliberately being shielded from judges and justices that are deemed to be committed to doing justice, even when it means that the federal government must lose. ‘’Be that as it may, if it will take the rest of my life in detention to produce me before a proper and impartial court, so be it. But let me say this for the world to know: I will not succumb to any trial conducted by any judge or court whose jurisdiction does not pass constitutional muster. Not now, not ever.’’

By Steve Oko

A fresh leadership crisis has erupted within the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, following the purported suspension of its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, by the faction led by Chikadibia Edoziem, a move the separatist organisation has swiftly rejected as unconstitutional and invalid.

The Edoziem-led Directorate of State, DOS, announced Kanu’s suspension in a statement issued on Thursday, saying the decision was taken after a meeting held on June 17 during which members reviewed an intelligence report allegedly submitted by IPOB’s M-Branch.

According to Edoziem, the report centred on an alleged meeting involving Kanu and officials of the Department of State Services, DSS, and the National Intelligence Agency, NIA, at the detention facility where the IPOB leader is being held.

The faction also announced Kanu’s removal as a director of Radio Biafra, saying the measures were aimed at repositioning the organisation and strengthening its operations.

Edoziem maintained that IPOB was founded as a self-determination movement nurtured by Biafrans in the diaspora and not by any individual, arguing that no single person possesses the authority to dissolve its central leadership structure.

He claimed the suspension was necessary to prevent what he described as unchecked actions, reckless assumptions of authority and activities capable of exposing IPOB members to arrests, torture and death.

The faction further alleged that there were plans to create a new militia that could trigger fresh violence in the South-East and weaken the IPOB structure.

According to the statement, the suspension would also prevent criminal elements from claiming legitimacy through the office of the IPOB leader to engage in activities inconsistent with the group’s objectives.

“Any such crime or criminal activity taken in the name of the suspended office of the leader shall not be attributed to IPOB but solely to the person or persons who may have instigated them,” the statement said.

However, IPOB, through its spokesman, Emma Powerful, dismissed the suspension as a nullity, insisting that Edoziem and members of what it described as the dissolved third administration of the Directorate of State lacked the authority to take any action against Kanu.

In a strongly-worded statement, the group said Kanu had already dissolved the Edoziem-led administration under powers vested in him by the IPOB Code of Conduct and had inaugurated a new leadership structure known as the fourth DOS administration under the leadership of Chris Nwaọgụ.

According to IPOB, any action taken by Edoziem and his associates after their removal from office amounts to an illegality because they no longer occupy any recognised position within the organisation.

“No person can derive authority from an office that has already ceased to exist,” the group stated.

IPOB argued that under its governing laws, only the office of the Supreme Leader possesses the authority to appoint, suspend, dismiss or dissolve principal officers and administrative structures within the movement.

Quoting provisions of its Code of Conduct, the group said the authority to appoint or remove principal officers rests exclusively with Kanu and can only be exercised by another official if expressly delegated by him.

“The authority to appoint, suspend, dismiss or dissolve principal officers and administrative structures resides exclusively in the Office of the Supreme Leader. No Coordinator, Principal Officer, Directorate, Committee or collective body possesses any constitutional authority to suspend, remove or overrule the Supreme Leader,” the statement said.

The organisation described the purported suspension as “foolish, delusional and a legal impossibility,” accusing the dissolved leadership of insubordination, constitutional misconduct and an attempt to usurp powers not granted to them.

IPOB further directed members worldwide to disregard all statements, appointments, suspensions and directives issued by Edoziem and members of the dissolved administration, insisting that such actions carry no legal or organisational consequence within the movement.

“The third administration of the Directorate of State no longer exists. Its tenure has been terminated by lawful authority and its powers extinguished,” the statement declared.

The group also urged media organisations to exercise caution in reporting developments concerning IPOB and avoid presenting statements from individuals it no longer recognises as speaking for the movement.

Reaffirming its loyalty to Kanu, IPOB said the newly constituted fourth DOS administration remains fully operational and accountable to the detained leader.

It warned that any person or group attempting to challenge Kanu’s authority or undermine the movement’s command structure would face disciplinary measures, including suspension, removal from office and expulsion.

“The authority of the Supreme Leader remains supreme, unquestionable and binding on all members,” IPOB declared.

The conflicting claims have deepened the leadership dispute within IPOB, with both factions asserting legitimacy and authority over the organisation’s affairs.

The post Edoziem group suspends Nnamdi Kanu, IPOB rejects move appeared first on Vanguard News.

Read More