The continued detention of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), despite multiple legal rulings in his favor, remains one of the most disturbing contradictions of Nigeria’s Fourth Republic. While public discourse often reduces the matter to issues of separatism or national security, a deeper interrogation reveals a far more calculated equation crafted from elite complicity, federal strategy, and intra-ethnic sabotage.
This is not merely a legal deadlock. It is a crisis deliberately sustained by a convergence of interests across political, ethnic, and institutional lines – a convergence that fears what Kanu symbolizes more than what he has done.
The Roots: Agitation Forged in Marginalization
Nnamdi Kanu did not emerge in a vacuum. His ascendancy was seeded in decades of post-civil war marginalization. Despite the Igbo people’s economic resilience and expansive diasporic networks, political exclusion remains entrenched. The post-war promises of Rehabilitation, Reconstruction, and Reintegration – the so-called “3Rs” never fully materialized.
Federal infrastructure bypassed the region. Strategic appointments seldom found Igbo names. Youth unemployment surged. Into this vacuum, Kanu stepped with the microphone of Radio Biafra, blending identity politics with historical grievances. His rhetoric, though divisive at times, touched raw nerves. For many disenfranchised Igbo youths, Kanu gave voice to long-silenced frustrations.
Where the Message Lost the Mission
Kanu’s passionate defiance, however, became both his strength and his strategic undoing. His uncompromising rhetoric alienated moderate allies, inflamed ethnic tensions, and allowed opponents to caricature him as a security threat rather than a civil rights leader.
He failed to appreciate a central Nigerian political reality that a mass support alone is insufficient without elite alliance-building, institutional engagement, or coalition-building. Unlike what Peter Obi is attempting today carefully cultivating cross-regional partnerships through coalition-building, Kanu offered no real policy roadmap, no vision for inclusive governance, and no strategy beyond confrontation.
The formation of the Eastern Security Network (ESN) further complicated matters. Though created in response to insecurity in the East, it played into the federal government’s hands, which swiftly designated IPOB a terrorist organization. This allowed the state to militarize the South-East under the pretense of counterterrorism.
The Ekpa Factor: Radicalism Unmoored
Matters worsened with the emergence of Simon Ekpa, a Finland-based agitator claiming to speak for IPOB after Kanu’s arrest. From the comfort of Europe, Ekpa imposed sit-at-home orders enforced by violence and intimidation, crippling local economies, disrupting education, and creating a humanitarian crisis in the region.
Ekpa is not merely a deviation from Kanu’s vision. He is a destabilizing actor with no accountability to those suffering the consequences of his edicts. Even Kanu, from detention, reportedly distanced himself from Ekpa’s actions – a directive Ekpa ignored.
This ideological fracture has splintered the IPOB movement, opened it to foreign manipulation and criminal infiltration, and turned a civil agitation into a chaotic, leaderless struggle, damaging the very cause it once championed.
The Silent Enablers: Igbo Political Elite and the Fear of Disruption
Yet, perhaps the most damning betrayal comes not from Abuja, but from within the South-East itself.
The Igbo political class, many of whom owe their positions to federal patronage, view Kanu’s potential return as a threat not just to Nigeria’s status quo, but to their own relevance. Kanu’s release could reawaken popular consciousness, galvanize youth movements, and shift loyalty away from Abuja-anointed elites.
And so, they say nothing. They do nothing. Their silence is not ignorance. It is a strategy and complicity.
This complicity manifests in lukewarm advocacy, selective outrage, and back-channel assurances to Abuja that they will keep the region “under control.” For them, Kanu’s indefinite detention is not a national security imperative but an elite survival tactic.
Tinubu’s Calculated Game: Strategic Containment as Political Weapon
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, a political chess master, is no stranger to strategic containment. For him, Kanu’s case is not just legal but a political calculus. Releasing Kanu might endear him to sections of the South-East, but it risks emboldening a charismatic figure he cannot control and sparking a regional political awakening.
Tinubu benefits from a fractured East. A divided South-East guarantees tokenism over transformation. The longer Kanu remains behind bars, the easier it is to isolate opposition, pacify federal loyalists, and justify militarized oversight.
Come 2027, Tinubu might dangle Kanu’s release as a last-minute political gesture, offered not out of justice, but out of electoral convenience.
What Must Be Done: Reclaiming Igbo Political Agency
This is no longer just about Nnamdi Kanu. His incarceration is a metaphor for the suffocation of regional political identity. It reveals a federation where court judgments are ignored, where fear dictates governance, and where justice is subordinated to strategy.
The Igbo political elite will not lead the charge for Kanu’s release. They have shown their loyalties lie with Abuja, not Alaigbo. Their silence must now be treated as betrayal. Their complicity must be confronted.
The torch now passes to the ordinary Igbo traders, students, religious bodies, artisans, civil society groups. Kanu’s freedom is no longer a legal battle; it is a political covenant. It will only come through mass mobilization and principled resistance.
The Political Litmus Test: No Justice, No Votes
If the APC-led government under Buhari orchestrated Kanu’s illegal rendition from Kenya, and the Tinubu administration continues to defy court orders, then the APC must be declared politically toxic across the South-East.
Let the call go forth:
- No APC rallies in Igbo land until Kanu is free.
- No town union endorsements.
- No traditional blessings.
- No vote from any village, youth convention, or professional association.
Let every APC senator, representative, commissioner, and appointee from the South-East be publicly held to account. Let them be asked in every community gathering: “Where were you when Kanu was unjustly detained?”
If zoning and restructuring can be negotiation tools, then Kanu’s freedom must become the non-negotiable baseline for electoral engagement in 2027.
This is not extremism. It is political self-respect.
The Verdict of History: Will the East Stand for Justice or Fall to Silence?
To argue that Kanu must remain in detention due to his rhetoric is to willfully ignore Nigeria’s record of state lawlessness—from electoral fraud to military repression. If radical speech is the crime, then let proportional justice prevail—not indefinite incarceration without verdict.
The South-East must now decide: Will it allow its political future to be dictated by convenience, silence, and fear? Or will it reclaim its voice, its dignity, and its rightful place in the federation?
From Nsukka to Onitsha, from Enugu to Aba, let this message resound:
Until Nnamdi Kanu is free, the APC is not welcome.
Until justice is served, collaboration is betrayal.
Let this be the new political gospel. Preach it boldly.
