Time To Resolve The Nnamdi Kanu Matter

Mazi Nnamdi Kanu burst into the nation’s consciousness as the leader of a bunch of sloganeering and flag-waving youths under the aegis of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), which he founded in 2012.

The main aim of IPOB, which does not represent the position of the majority of the Igbo, is to restore the defunct separatist state of Biafra. The late Ikemba Nnewi, Dim Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu who led the secession bid had described Biafra as a lost cause. That authentic Igbo leader opted for a Biafra of the mind where the Igbo will be given their due in a united Nigeria.

Kanu got into bad weather with his acerbic rhetoric on a United Kingdom-registered radio station named Radio Biafra. He was arrested on treason charges in Lagos, Nigeria on 14 October 2015 and was detained for more than a year, despite various court orders that ruled for his release.
Civil society has faulted his continued incarceration by raising significant human rights issues. They also think that his release could pave the way for dialogue and a peaceful resolution to the longstanding issues in the southeastern region.

From the legal standpoint, there are concerns about the legality and fairness of Kanu’s arrest and detention, even though his continued detention has been a source of unrest and agitation within the Southeast. Many believe that his release could help calm the situation, reduce protests and violence, and contribute to overall political stability in Nigeria. According to those who push this idea, Kanu’s release could also improve relations between the government and the southeastern populace.

Beyond these views, there is significant public support for Nnamdi Kanu’s release, both domestically and internationally. It is thought in certain quarters that releasing him could address public grievances and demonstrate that the government is responsive to the concerns of its citizens, potentially boosting its credibility and legitimacy in the eyes of the people.

On his part, Kanu has been seeking legal means to regain his freedom. However, the recent fundamental human rights suit his legal team instituted against the federal government was dismissed by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

At a just-concluded meeting in Enugu, southeast governors advocated for resolving this matter and pledged to meet with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to discuss possibilities for Kanu’s release. Previously, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, had indicated that the detained IPOB leader’s offence is difficult and can only be resolved by a competent court of law. It is pertinent to stress that very few wars end on the battlefield. Kanu’s case can explore the wider precincts of natural justice and good conscience while the courts are on it.

We disagree with the views of the Attorney-General of the federation based on the fact that Sunday Igboho, his co-separatist agitator from the Southwest, has since been forgiven his offence. Furthermore, other terrorists, many of whom killed Nigerians in their numbers as part of the agitation for a caliphate have been ‘deradicalised’ and re-integrated into civil society even as the loved ones of their victims, including soldiers, are left to mourn their loss in internally displaced persons (IDPs) camps.

Notably, despite Kanu’s noise on the platform of his radio Biafra, no lives were lost. Although it was obvious that he irritated those who felt that he was trying to resurrect a dead issue, he nonetheless did not harm anyone in any way. Kanu obviously constituted himself into a public nuisance even among the Igbo, who deliberately ignored him because, as a young man who did not experience the civil war and the devastation it caused in Igboland, he was and still is stupidly idealistic.

The mainstream Igbo never took note of him until the federal government miscalculated by drawing attention to his incendiary propensity and made him a hero of doubtful relevance by his arrest and incarceration.

His plight was worsened by the pretensions of the political elite in Igboland, who began to feel threatened by his rising profile, just as he located himself on the wrong side of the law. Politicians won electoral victories using his name and with a pledge to affect his release once in public office. True to type, those politicians never mentioned his name as soon as they were sworn in.

This newspaper has consistently classified Kanu as a terrorist, as pronounced by the federal government. We have also observed that the same government had forgiven terrorists who, in their mode of operation, caused more harm to the polity than Kanu would have conceived in his thoughts and actions.

From this perspective, we appeal to the President to temper justice with mercy and apply compassion on this touchy issue that has caused the Igbo nation a lot economically through the various sit-at-home incitements by some misguided elements within the zone. We also urge President Tinubu to seize this opportunity to put the Igbo in his debt by acceding to the plea by well-meaning Nigerians who also think that it is time the nation put this matter behind it and forge ahead with the project of healing wounds and calming frayed nerves. More importantly, the President must not allow political jobbers in the Southeast to make a capital of this extraordinarily humanitarian situation.