The Mazi Nnamdi Kanu Defence Consortium, a group of lawyers representing the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has rejected claims by Nigeria’s Defence Headquarters that security has improved in the South-East following Kanu’s incarceration and intensified military operations in the region.
The Defence Headquarters, through its Director of Defence Media Operations, Major General Michael Onoja, recently stated that the imprisonment of Kanu alongside sustained military actions had helped restore stability in the South-East.
However, reacting on Friday, the Kanu defence team, through its spokesperson, Onyedikachi Ifedi, Esq, described the claim as false and misleading, insisting that the Nigerian government itself bears responsibility for the insecurity that has plagued the region.
In a statement titled “The Nigerian military cannot whitewash history – their hands are too soaked in blood,” the group accused the military of attempting to rewrite history.
According to the statement, the crisis in the South-East predates IPOB and its leader, arguing that state actions against unarmed civilians were responsible for escalating tensions in the region.
The defence team cited incidents including the Nkpor killings, the shooting of unarmed youths at National High School in Aba, violence linked to a Trump solidarity rally in Port Harcourt, and the 2017 military operation at Kanu’s residence in Umuahia, during which several people were reportedly killed.
“For the Nigerian military to now present itself as a stabilising force is deeply troubling,” the statement said, adding that blaming IPOB and Kanu amounts to propaganda rather than genuine security assessment.
The lawyers further argued that the insecurity in the South-East was not driven by IPOB, but by cult clashes, political militias, and criminal networks allegedly sponsored by politicians and aided by compromised security operatives.
They also referenced past comments by retired General T.Y. Danjuma, who publicly accused elements within the Nigerian military of colluding with violent actors against civilians.
Disputing the military’s assessment, the defence team maintained that security should not be measured by what it described as “fear-induced silence,” arbitrary arrests, or prolonged military presence in communities.
“Silence enforced by intimidation is not peace,” the statement said, insisting that repression cannot be equated with stability.
The group called for the unconditional release of Nnamdi Kanu, arguing that his continued detention violates both domestic and international legal standards. It also demanded independent investigations into alleged killings by the Nigerian military across the country and an end to what it termed the criminalisation of peaceful political expression in the South-East.
The defence team concluded that the international community is becoming increasingly aware, it said, of what it described as Nigeria’s tendency to manufacture internal enemies to divert attention from corruption, insecurity, and governance failures.
Comments