₦airaland Forum

IPOB Lawyer Ejiofor Applauds Return of Calm in South-East


The Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has commended the restoration of peace and calm in the South-East region.
Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, who holds the title Dunu–Ezeugosinachi, made this known in his Midweek Musings on Wednesday, titled: “The Return of Calm in Alaigbo: A Triumph to Cherish, Not a Licence to Relapse.”
He described the development as gladdening, noting that people in the region can now go about their lawful activities without fear or intimidation from any quarter.
According to him, “It is no longer a matter of conjecture, but an evident and reassuring reality, that the entire South-East region has, to a commendable extent, regained a climate of relative peace and civil order.”
He further stated that this development is not incidental, but rather reflective of the intrinsic values of the Igbo nation,values deeply rooted in enterprise, communal harmony, resilience, and an abiding respect for the sanctity of life and lawful coexistence.
“This peace, though once disrupted by forces whose calculated objective was to destabilise the region often, regrettably, aided by misguided elements and emboldened by unscrupulous individuals in positions of authority who revel in the spoils of chaos,has now been painstakingly reclaimed through deliberate, coordinated, and principled efforts of critical stakeholders.
“The current stewardship of the Global Peaceful Restoration—genuine lovers of freedom, steadfastly united by an unwavering commitment to order, justice, and social equilibrium is eminently deserving of the highest commendation.
“I must also, with measured emphasis, acknowledge the remarkable contributions of those at the helm of certain security agencies, particularly the current leadership of the State Security Service. Their tenure has been distinguished not only by operational professionalism but also by a rare adherence to civility, restraint, and refreshingly apolitical engagement.
“Unlike what obtained in the past—when the situation resembled an ethnic war against this region, and when certain approaches unfairly cast the average Igbo youth under suspicion, often culminating in arbitrary arrests and the all-too-familiar euphemism of ‘enforced disappearances’ the present methodology reflects a paradigm shift grounded in respect for constitutional liberties and human dignity. One might even say, with cautious optimism, that decency has staged a quiet but notable return.”
Ejiofor noted that the current atmosphere across the region speaks for itself, as Igbo youths, women, and citizens across all strata now freely engage in lawful pursuits. They associate openly, exercise their constitutionally guaranteed rights, and go about their daily lives without the pervasive fear that once defined a troubling era an era often reinforced by hostile security practices and dangerous ethnic profiling.
He emphasised that the transformation is neither accidental nor superficial, but the result of deliberate policy recalibration and humane security governance.
According to him, it also demonstrates that the chaos previously witnessed was, in part, driven by actors who benefited from sustained instability.
“Nevertheless,” he cautioned, “it would be both naïve and imprudent to assume that this hard-earned peace is beyond threat. There remain individuals and interests who, either out of discontent or less noble motivations, may yet attempt to reintroduce instability and discord into the region.
“Peace, as history repeatedly reminds us, is often most vulnerable at the very moment it is proclaimed ‘total.’ It is therefore imperative that all relevant authorities and stakeholders remain vigilant, proactive, and unwavering in their commitment to preserving this fragile yet promising stability.”he added.
He stressed that the lessons of history must neither be forgotten nor ignored, warning against any relapse into an era of fear, uncertainty, and regression,one from which the region has only recently and painfully emerged.
Rather, he urged that the prevailing peace be consciously nurtured, strategically protected, and collectively sustained as the indispensable foundation for socio-economic advancement and generational prosperity.
He added that Alaigbo is gradually reclaiming its lost glory and emerging as a model of recovery.
“Indeed, peace is not merely the absence of conflict; it is the presence of justice, equity, and purposeful governance. Having attained it, we must now institutionalise it, lest it quietly slip through our fingers while we congratulate ourselves prematurely.”he stated.
Ejiofor stated that the restoration of peace in Alaigbo is both a triumph and a responsibility.
He said it places a solemn duty on leaders and citizens alike to guard, preserve, and strengthen it.
“With unity of purpose and fidelity to the rule of law, this peace shall not only endure but flourish from generation to generation.
“May the Almighty continue to guide and preserve Alaigbo.”he added.

Anaocha/Njikoka/Dunukofia: Why APGA’s Best Bet for Reps Is Oli


By Titus Eleweke

As the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) positions for the 2027 general elections, the Anaocha/Njikoka/Dunukofia Federal Constituency ticket is not just another slot to fill , it is a test of the party’s fidelity to its founding creed,people-first governance, accountability, and measurable development.
Barrister Chukwudi Oli is the candidate who forces that test, and the right answer is clear.

Oli is not a product of political inheritance. He is a product of hardship. He knows deprivation not from briefings, but from lived experience.
That matters, because representation without empathy is theatre.
At a time when voters distrust the distance between Abuja and their daily struggles, Oli brings the constituency’s reality into the room with him.

Yet this is not an argument built on biography alone. As a legal practitioner, Oli brings rigor where rhetoric has reigned.
He understands lawmaking as craft, not performance. His pledge to publish every constituency allocation and open his stewardship to public audit is not a campaign line, it is a structural break from the opacity that has hollowed out public trust.

More important is his rejection of stomach-infrastructure politics.
Oli’s agenda is built on sustainable empowerment, building entrepreneurs, strengthening institutions, and investing in human capital.
That is how you replace cycles of dependency with corridors of opportunity. For a constituency this large and economically strategic, anything less is dereliction.

He also understands that legislation without listening is imposition. Regular town halls, ward-level consultations, and constituency feedback are not appendages to his plan, they are the plan.
Laws must be rooted in the lives they govern, and Oli intends to legislate from the ground up.

Strategically, Oli’s readiness to work in lockstep with Governor Charles Chukwuma Soludo’s administration is decisive. Federal representation that fights the state wastes time; representation that aligns with it unlocks roads, schools, markets, and jobs. Oli offers APGA a federal-state synergy this constituency has not seen in years.

Anaocha/Njikoka/Dunukofia is too vast, too complex, and too consequential for average ambition.
The moment demands capacity, integrity, and vision without apology.
Past representatives have played their part. But 2027 is not about gratitude , it is about readiness.
Oli brings the competence to draft quality bills, the credibility to demand accountability, and the character to stay answerable.

APGA now faces a defining choice: repeat old patterns or renew its promise. Handing the ticket to Barrister Chukwudi Oli does more than name a candidate. It declares what APGA believes leadership should look like, and what Anambra deserves.

This is the imperative. In Oli, APGA does not just have an aspirant. It has its strongest case for restoring faith in representation and delivering progress that people can touch.

APGA Vice Chair Ehiemere Urges increased Funding Structure


The National Vice Chairman (South-East) of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Rev. Augustine Ehiemere, has called for deliberate, transparent, and sustainable funding mechanisms to strengthen the party’s institutional capacity and drive its expansion.
Rev. Ehiemere made this appeal at the APGA South-East Zonal Stakeholders’ Meeting held in Awka, the capital of Anambra State on Saturday.
He described the South-East as the ideological and political stronghold of APGA, stressing that the party must consolidate its base while positioning itself for broader national relevance.
According to him, his recent efforts to revive grassroots engagement across the zone were aimed at restoring confidence among party faithful and reconnecting with its core values.
He noted that a sensitization tour across the five South-East states helped rekindle enthusiasm among members who had become disillusioned.
“Many of our members were losing morale, but through sustained engagement and mobilization, we have reignited their commitment. APGA must not only survive in the South-East; it must grow and dominate its natural political space,” he said.
Rev. Ehiemere, a former Abia State Chairman of APGA and a longstanding foundation member, urged elected officials, aspirants, and stakeholders at all levels federal, state, and local—to commit financial and material resources to the party.
He stated that political success requires not just popular support but also strong institutional backing.
Reflecting on his 2025 outreach initiative, he explained that the tour was driven by the principle of “onye aghala nwanne ya” (leave no one behind), which he said remains central to APGA’s philosophy.
Despite limited financial support, he personally facilitated meetings with zonal officers, state chairmen, and party secretaries, often covering logistics such as accommodation and transportation.
“These efforts demonstrate commitment, but passion alone cannot sustain a political movement. The success of our outreach showed that the people believe in APGA, yet we lack the organizational resources to consolidate that goodwill,” he added.
He commended Hon. Eze Chinedu Yagazie for his consistent support, describing him as a model of loyalty and dedication to the party’s ideals.
Looking ahead, Rev. Ehiemere outlined a vision for a more visible and symbolically resonant APGA presence across the region. He proposed the deployment of branded vehicles bearing the names of iconic figures such as Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu and Chinua Achebe, arguing that such initiatives would reinforce identity and inspire a new generation of supporters.
He stressed that achieving this vision would require empowering the office of the National Vice Chairman with adequate resources to coordinate activities across all five South-East states simultaneously.
In a strongly worded appeal, he issued what he described as a “Macedonian call” to APGA officeholders:
“I call on our governors, deputy governors, senators, members of the House of Representatives, state legislators, and political appointees: you did not rise in isolation. You emerged on the platform of APGA, and that platform now requires your support. This is not an appeal for charity but a call for structured, accountable, and sustained investment in the party. Strengthen the party, and it will safeguard your political future.”
He specifically urged the Governor of Anambra State, Charles Soludo, to spearhead a comprehensive financial and structural reform of the party.
“Let history record that under your leadership, APGA overcame its limitations, restored its institutional strength, and expanded beyond its traditional borders. That would be a defining legacy,” he said.
Rev. Ehiemere said that APGA must transition from a regional force to a national contender, noting that the party still has “regions to capture and a nation to influence.”
He also commended Governor Soludo for his governance record in Anambra State and his role in sustaining the party.

In his response, Governor Soludo acknowledged the urgency of establishing a more inclusive and sustainable funding model for APGA.
He stressed that financial responsibility should not rest solely on the governor and elected officials but must be shared collectively by party members.
“The party must be structured in a way that encourages contributions from all members. I will urge the National Chairman to set up a committee to design a transparent and effective fundraising framework. Party members must begin to see dues payment as a civic responsibility within the organization. Together, we will build a financially resilient party,” he said.

Family Demands Independent Probe into Officer Udeh’s Death


Titus Eleweke


The family of the late soldier, Jude Osondu Udeh, has called for a thorough, transparent, and independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding the untimely death of their son.
Speaking through their lawyer, Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, the family stated that they are seeking formal communication through appropriate channels, including the Honourable Minister of Defence and the Chief of Defence Staff.
Ejiofor made this known in his weekly statement titled “Weekend Musings: Setting the Record Straight on the Manifestly Erroneous and Misleading Account Advanced by the Nigerian Military Regarding the Disgraceful Handling of the Death and Burial of a Young Soldier Late Jude Osondu Udeh.”
The family maintained that their demand is neither excessive nor unreasonable; rather, it represents the bare minimum owed to a soldier who paid the ultimate price in service to his country, particularly under questionable circumstances.
According to the statement, the military’s insinuation that it bore financial responsibility is demonstrably false.
The family noted that not a single kobo was expended by the Nigerian military in transporting the deceased’s remains to his hometown in Ezeagu Local Government Area of Enugu State, nor in settling mortuary expenses.
These obligations, the statement said, were borne entirely by the grieving family, with documented receipts readily available as proof.
“One might have expected, at the very least, that an institution so eager to claim procedural propriety would ensure its assertions were anchored in verifiable fact rather than convenient fiction,” the statement added.
The family further described as the most egregious affront the complete absence of military presence at the burial. Despite due notification to the 82 Division in Enugu, not a single soldier was present to accord the deceased even the most basic military honours.
“No guard of honour. No ceremonial salute. Not even a symbolic representation. One is compelled to ask: has the standard for honouring fallen soldiers now been so dramatically lowered that total absence qualifies as compliance? Or is this a novel doctrine in military tradition, where silence replaces the bugle and invisibility substitutes for honour?” the statement queried.
The family indicated that it may be compelled to publish visual evidence of what it described as “astonishing neglect,” to enable the public to assess whether this constituted the “full compliments” the military claims to have rendered.
Addressing claims by some commentators that the body should not have been released to the family, the statement described such views as legally untenable and inconsistent with established military practice.
It emphasized that the family of a fallen soldier retains the right to request the release of their loved one’s remains for burial.
Where such a request is granted, as in this case, it does not extinguish or diminish the military’s obligation to accord the soldier full ceremonial honours. “Honour, after all, is not a logistical inconvenience to be waived at will; it is the very essence of military tradition,” the statement noted.
The family expressed concern that what is particularly troubling is not only the initial lapse but the subsequent attempts to obfuscate, deny, and recast events in a manner that strains credulity.
They stressed that institutions earn respect not by asserting infallibility, but by demonstrating the humility to acknowledge errors and the integrity to correct them.
According to the statement, it would have served the Nigerian military better to admit, with candour, that a regrettable oversight occurred and to take immediate corrective steps.
“Regrettably, instead, the military has presented a narrative suggesting that what the world plainly did not see somehow occurred in a realm beyond evidence,” it added.
The statement further emphasized that the issue transcends the case of one fallen soldier, warning that it sends a troubling message to serving personnel,that their sacrifice may be met not with honour, but with administrative indifference and post-event revisionism.
“The abandonment of Soldier Jude Osondu Udeh in death, after serving his nation in life, constitutes a profound moral failing. It is a disservice not only to his memory but to the very ideals the military purports to uphold,” it stated.
The family reiterated that it does not seek confrontation, but rather truth, accountability, and dignity principles it described as fundamental obligations rather than extravagant demands.
It expressed hope that the military high command would, even at this stage, choose the path of honour by acknowledging lapses, offering a sincere apology, instituting corrective measures, and ensuring that no other family is subjected to similar indignity.
“Anything less would only deepen the wound, and history is seldom kind to institutions that prefer denial over duty,” the statement asked .
The family also noted that it felt compelled to respond to what it described as a narrative circulated by the Nigerian military that is “remarkably detached from verifiable facts,” raising concerns about the implications for public confidence and the morale of personnel still serving on the frontlines.
“Upon a careful reading of the said account, our immediate concern was not merely the distortion it contained, but the far-reaching implications such institutional indifference to truth portends for public confidence and for the morale of those gallant men and women still risking their lives in service to the nation,” the statement said.
It added that the decision to initially refrain from convening a press conference to address the alleged inaccuracies was deliberate, aimed at preserving institutional dignity and avoiding damage to the morale of troops.
“However, silence must never be mistaken for acquiescence,” the statement stated.

IPOB Lawyer to Govt: Confront Violence, Not Diversions

Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has called on the government to decisively confront and prosecute what he described as a brutal and existential campaign of violence against the Nigerian state.
According to him, there is a need for collective courage to confront uncomfortable truths, dismantle the architecture of denial, and unequivocally call out those who, whether by action or omission, enable these heinous crimes.
He warned that without such resolve, any purported solution will remain illusory.
Ejiofor made this call in a statement titled “Hypocrisy at Its Peak: The Dangerous Diversion from Nigeria’s Real Enemies,” which was made available to newsmen on Tuesday.
He argued that the persistent attribution of the ongoing violence to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is a misdirection and a deliberate diversion from the real enemies of the state.
“What can only be described as a desperate bid to manufacture a convenient diversion has seen attention redirected towards the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB)—a peaceful movement of global reach, present in over fifty countries and widely acknowledged for its non-violent posture,yet paradoxically branded among financiers of terrorism. Such rhetorical gymnastics not only strain credulity but also betray a troubling inclination towards obfuscation rather than resolution,” he said.
According to him, the very zenith of hypocrisy is reached when deliberate and calculated efforts are made to divert attention from the palpable and ongoing atrocities perpetrated by virulent jihadist elements and terrorists, including those disguising themselves as herdsmen, Boko Haram insurgents, and ISWAP militants.
He stressed that these groups have, with chilling consistency, prosecuted a brutal and existential campaign of violence against the Nigerian state.
Ejiofor noted that their onslaught is neither selective nor restrained, but rather directed against the very fabric of national stability.
He added that the violence targets not only Nigerian security institutions—which are already overstretched—but also defenceless citizens whose blood is shed daily across the North-West, North-Central, North-East, and the Middle Belt.
The human rights lawyer further stated that the unrelenting carnage, which ought to command the undivided urgency of both government and public discourse, is instead being overshadowed by what he described as a curious and disingenuous narrative.
He maintained that this pattern of misdirection and selective outrage is precisely why the hydra-headed insecurity ravaging the northern regions continues to defy meaningful resolution.
Ejiofor reiterated that until Nigerians summon the collective courage to confront uncomfortable truths, dismantle the architecture of denial, and unequivocally call out those who enable these crimes, any purported solution will remain illusory.
“Only through candour, accountability, and an unflinching commitment to truth can we hope to recalibrate our national response and reclaim the path to peace and security,” he said.

Anambra East and West: Between Facts and Fictions


By Okey Maduforo

Politics in Anambra East and West Federal Constituency has long been shaped by a tradition of loyalty, camaraderie, and structured party cohesion within the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA).

This culture did not emerge by chance or coercion,it was built over time through shared commitment and mutual respect among party faithfuls.

It is against this backdrop that recent claims by a faceless group styling itself as “Concerned APGA Stakeholders” must be examined critically.

Their allegations against Hon. Chinedu Obidigwe,an aspirant for the House of Representatives raise more questions than the answer.
At the heart of their claims are accusations of party hijack and disregard for leadership.
Yet, there is no verifiable evidence to support these assertions.
No formal query, disciplinary action, or documented complaint from any recognized party authority ward, local government, or state has been presented against Obidigwe.

In political organizations, silence from official structures often speaks louder than anonymous accusations.
Equally telling is the absence of specifics. The group failed to identify any legitimate party executive allegedly involved in the so-called irregularities.
More striking is the claim regarding a “campaign council” that, by all available information, has not even been constituted.
This raises concerns about the credibility and intent of the accusers.
References to past leadership, including allegations attributed to a former state chairman, also lack documentary backing. In political discourse, claims without evidence are not just weak,they are dangerous, as they risk misleading the public and undermining institutional integrity.
Legal matters cited by the group further complicate their narrative.
Issues before the courts are, by principle, sub judice and should not be trivialized in public debates.
Moreover, previous legal challenges concerning Obidigwe’s personal records have reportedly been resolved in his favor, reinforcing the argument that these allegations may be recycled or exaggerated.
On the question of internal democracy, APGA’s track record in conducting primaries and producing candidates remains a critical reference point.
Disagreements and legal contests are not uncommon in democratic processes, but court affirmations of outcomes,such as those involving primary election disputes ,lend legitimacy to the system rather than diminish it.
The argument about electoral performance also deserves context. Electoral outcomes are often influenced by broader political currents.
The last general elections, for instance, were significantly shaped by shifting voter sentiments across party lines.
Reducing such outcomes to individual unpopularity oversimplifies a complex political reality.
Concerns about tenure and representation similarly require nuance.
Legislative experience can be an asset, particularly in systems where seniority influences access to resources and committee influence.
While fresh perspectives are important, continuity can also enhance constituency benefits.
Ultimately, the emergence of anonymous groups making sweeping allegations reflects a troubling trend in political engagement one where anonymity replaces accountability.
If these stakeholders genuinely exist and seek reform, transparency should be their first step.
The people of Anambra East and West deserve a political discourse grounded in facts, not speculation, in accountability, not anonymity.
As the electoral process unfolds, it is this distinction between fact and fiction,that will shape both public perception and democratic outcomes.

Ejiofor Gives Military 14 Days to Probe Osondu Ude’s Death


Titus Eleweke



Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has called on the Honourable Minister of Defence, General Christopher Musa (Rtd.), to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death of the late Jude Osondu Ude at the 17 Brigade, Katsina.
He also urged the Chief of Army Staff, Lieutenant General Waidi Shaibu, and the Chief of Defence Staff, General Olufemi Oluyede, to immediately institute a thorough, transparent, and uncompromising investigation into the circumstances leading to Ude’s stabbing, subsequent death, and the alleged neglect he suffered both in life and after death.
In a statement issued on Saturday titled “Weekend Musings: Blood Within the Barracks,When Duty is Betrayed and Honour Abandoned: The Tragic, Untold Demise of a Young Soldier,” Ejiofor decried the grievous circumstances surrounding Ude’s death and abandonment.
He stated that the military authorities have fourteen (14) days to take meaningful action, failing which legal steps will be taken to seek redress.
He recounted that Jude, gravely wounded and bleeding, struggled within the barracks seeking help, possibly from fellow soldiers, but none came to his aid.
He said he was later admitted to a hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries on March 22, 2026, a week after the attack.
“Thus ended the life of a man who had sworn to defend others, but was denied defence in his own hour of peril,” he said.
Ejiofor noted that he holds the Honourable Minister of Defence in high esteem but warned that the spectre of internal sabotage, rivalry, and clandestine complicity must not be allowed to fester within the military.
He stressed that those found culpable must be brought to justice without fear or favour, adding that only then can public confidence in the armed forces be restored.
“Let it not be said that silence prevailed where outrage was demanded. Let it not be recorded that impunity triumphed over justice. Let it not become the norm that a soldier fears not only the enemy without, but the dagger within.
“We further state, with all due solemnity, that should no meaningful administrative steps be taken within fourteen (14) days to unravel this disturbing episode, we shall be constrained to invoke all lawful mechanisms to compel accountability,” he said.
Ejiofor described the incident as both a personal tragedy and a national indictment.
He said that enlistment in the armed forces is an act of courage and sacrifice that should be met with dignity and protection, lamenting that in this case, that sacred covenant appears to have been broken.
Late Jude Osondu Ude, a Master’s degree holder and a soldier on the verge of confirmation as a Lieutenant, was said to have been inspired by his father, a retired soldier.
He reportedly served with dedication and was initially posted to Ibadan before being deployed to Katsina on special assignment, where he served with the 17 Brigade and rose to head the Garrison.
According to Ejiofor, Ude was widely regarded as fearless, disciplined, and uncompromising in his duty. However, these qualities may have unsettled certain interests within the system.
He questioned the official narrative suggesting an ambush, describing it as convenient and potentially misleading.
He alleged that, on March 15, 2026, within the 17 Brigade Garrison in Katsina, Ude was brutally stabbed in what appeared to be an internally orchestrated attack.
“Gravely wounded, he sought help within the barracks but was left unaided. He later died from his injuries, raising troubling questions about safety within the ranks,” he stated.
Ejiofor further lamented that the tragedy was compounded by what he described as institutional neglect.
He alleged that the soldier’s remains were abandoned by the military, with no structured support or honour accorded to him.
According to him, Ude’s father, elderly and grief-stricken, bore the financial burden of transporting his son’s body from Katsina to Enugu at significant personal cost, including expenses for logistics, feeding, mortuary services, and ambulance conveyance, without any support from the military.

According to Ejiofor, Jude's father paid a staggering personal cost of ₦750,000.00 merely to transport his son’s corpse from Katsina to Enugu. Additional expenses followed: ₦50,000.00 on road logistics, ₦20,000.00 on feeding those who accompanied him, ₦25,000.00 for mortuary services, and ₦35,000.00 for ambulance conveyance. Not a single kobo was provided by the Nigerian Military.
He described the situation as a “national embarrassment,” questioning the value placed on service and sacrifice.
The soldier was buried on April 5, 2026 (Easter Sunday), in his hometown in Ezeagu Local Government Area of Enugu State. Ejiofor noted that there was no ceremonial guard, no final salute, and no military presence at the burial.
“In light of these grievous circumstances, we call on the Minister of Defence, the Chief of Army Staff, and the Chief of Defence Staff to institute a thorough investigation into this matter,” he reiterated.
He warned that internal sabotage within the military must be addressed urgently, stating that failure to honour fallen soldiers undermines national security and morale.
“A nation that fails to honour its fallen heroes does more than betray the dead; it imperils the living,” he said.
He said that while Ude may have been silenced, the questions surrounding his death remain and must be answered.
“Justice must not only be done; it must be seen, felt, and restored.” he said .

US orders embassy staff departure ,serious concern, says Ejiofor


Titus Eleweke


Lawyer to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir ifeanyi Ejiofor has described the United States’ authorization for non-emergency staff and their families to vacate its embassy in Nigeria as a serious security concern.

Ejiofor, a human rights lawyer also stated that the decision by the United States Government to authorize the departure of non-emergency personnel sends an unmistakable signal to the Nigerian government about the state of security in the country.
In a statement titled “When Foreign Missions Start Packing, It’s Not ‘Speculation’, It’s a Security Verdict,” issued on Thursday, he said the decision is not merely administrative but rather deeply emblematic of broader concerns.
He added that the move by the United States to advise its citizens and diplomatic staff to depart from its embassy in Abuja reflects a deteriorating security situation.
“It sends an unmistakable signal that all is far from well within our security architecture,” he said.

Read the full statement:
Based on information updated as of April 9, 2026, the United States government has authorized the departure of non-emergency staff and their families from its embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, owing to a deteriorating security situation.

Yet, in what now appears to be a masterclass in selective urgency, the Nigerian Government remains deeply engrossed in strategizing for the 2027 general elections, while insecurity statistics are not merely rising, but spiraling into an alarming crescendo. One is almost tempted to ask: are elections being planned for the living or memorialized for the fallen?

There is hardly a day, or night, that passes without grim reports of mass casualties arising from coordinated jihadist terrorist attacks on ancestral communities across the North-West, North-Central, North-East, and the Middle Belt. These victims are not abstractions; they are ordinary, unarmed citizens; people like you and I, left exposed in a nation that seems increasingly resigned to reactive condolences rather than proactive protection.

Only days ago, a junior colleague of mine from Southern Kaduna confided that prior intelligence warnings had been duly communicated to the appropriate authorities before the last Sunday attack in Arikpo community southern Kaduna. Predictably, nothing was done. What followed the carnage was the now-familiar theatre of afterthoughts, official claims of “thwarted attacks,” as though rhetoric could resurrect the dead or console the bereaved.

The decision of the United States is not merely administrative, it is emblematic. It sends an unmistakable signal that all is far from well within our security architecture. In any system guided by foresight rather than optics, such a signal would trigger decisive, coordinated, and immediate action, not bureaucratic inertia dressed in press statements.

But then again, perhaps in our peculiar reality, perception management has become a substitute for governance.

Rights Lawyer Blasts Mutfwang’s APC Speech to Constituents


Human rights lawyer Ifeanyi Ejiofor has condemned Caleb Mutfwang of Plateau State for addressing grieving constituents from within the confines of an Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC).
In a statement titled “WEDNESDAY MUSINGS: BLOOD ON THE PLATEAU — GOVERNANCE FROM WITHIN ARMOURED SHELLS, WHILE CITIZENS BLEED IN THE OPEN,” issued on Wednesday, Ejiofor questioned whether the governor’s decision was driven by credible security intelligence or by an excessive display of caution.
Ejiofor, who holds the traditional title of Dunu-Ezeugosinachi, described the governor’s action as deeply troubling, characterizing it as both poor optics and a damning reflection of leadership in a time of crisis.
He argued that such a posture raises serious concerns about the relationship between the government and the people he serves.
The human rights lawyer further queried the implications of a situation in which a state’s Chief Security Officer cannot stand unshielded among his own citizens.
According to him, if the governor is unable to address his people without the protection of an armoured vehicle, it raises a more disturbing question: what then becomes of the ordinary farmer, the defenceless child, or the market woman who must navigate daily life without any such protection?


Read the full statement below:

The recurring tragedy in Plateau State has, once again, etched another grim chapter into our national conscience. On Sunday night, barely three nights ago, jihadist extremist launched a coordinated and deadly attack on the agrarian communities within Bokkos Local Government Area, with particular devastation reported in villages such as Hurti and its surrounding settlements. Dozens of innocent residents were brutally killed; early reports place the casualty figure at over 40 persons, with many others injured, displaced, or still unaccounted for.

This was not an isolated eruption of violence; rather, it forms part of a sustained pattern of bloodletting that has plagued Plateau for decades, an ugly intersection of ethno-religious tensions, land disputes, and the persistent infiltration of armed militias and bandits, often described, not without controversy, as Fulani extremist elements pursuing expansionist objectives.

Yet, beyond the horror of the killings lies an even more disturbing symbol of state failure: the image, both literal and metaphorical-of a Governor addressing his grieving constituents from within the perceived safety of an Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC). Whether compelled by genuine security intelligence or by an excess of caution, the optics are damning. It is governance at a distance, leadership insulated, quite physically, from the very people it swore to protect.

One is left to ponder: if the Chief Security Officer of a state cannot stand unshielded among his own people, what then becomes of the ordinary farmer, the defenceless child, or the market woman?

There is a bitter irony in the timing. This latest carnage comes in the wake of high-profile political gatherings-most notably the just-concluded APC National Convention held in Abuja; where loyalty to power blocs is loudly reaffirmed, whilst loyalty to the sanctity of human life is quietly abandoned. The drums of electioneering beat ever louder and, predictably, the cries from the hinterlands fade into the background noise of political ambition.

Indeed, as Nigeria inches closer to another electoral cycle, governance appears to be slipping into autopilot. Security briefings give way to strategy meetings; intelligence coordination is overshadowed by campaign logistics; and the protection of lives is relegated to a mere footnote beneath the pursuit of political dominance.

And so, the terrorists adapt.
They understand our rhythms now. They know when attention is divided, when leadership is distracted, and when the machinery of state is retooled, not for protection, but for persuasion. Within that window of neglect, they strike with precision and impunity.

What we are witnessing is not merely a failure of security; it is a failure of priority.

A nation in which its leaders feel safer behind armoured steel than among their own citizens is a nation in urgent need of introspection. For governance is not measured by the eloquence of speeches delivered under protection, but by the courage to ensure that such protection is unnecessary in the first place.

If the value of human life continues to depreciate against the rising currency of political ambition, then we must confront an uncomfortable truth: we are not merely losing territory; we are losing our humanity. Until leadership rediscovers its first duty, the protection of life, every campaign promise will ring hollow over the graves of the forgotten.

As we step into this new month, may divine grace guide us, protect the vulnerable, and awaken the conscience of those entrusted with power. May doors long shut be opened, and may peace, long absent, find its way back to our land.
Amen.
Happy New Month to you all.

IPOB Counsel Knocks FG’s Terror Rehab Proposal

Nigerian renowned human rights lawyer and lead counsel for the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has condemned the so-called “terrorist rehabilitation policy” as presently advanced by security authorities.
Barrister Ejiofor stated: “What the Chief of Defence Staff now proposes, in effect, is that when any of these violent non-state actors surrender, the State should receive them, rehabilitate them, and, in due course, reintegrate them into the very society they once set ablaze.”
In a statement titled “Weekend Musings: Terrorist Rehabilitation and a Soldier’s Blood; The Tragic Death of My Driver’s Son — The Quiet Agony of a Nation that Pardons Its Destroyers,” he argued that the rehabilitation and reintegration of such individuals raise serious legal and moral questions.
Ejiofor maintained that the proposal raises not only legal and moral concerns but also profound existential questions about justice, collective memory, and the value society places on human life.
He further stated that while a nation must uphold the ideals of humanity and redemption, such efforts must not erode the sanctity of justice or diminish the sacrifices of those who risk their lives to protect others.
Ejiofor who is Dunu–Ezeugosinachi warned that when policies appear to reward impunity, they risk emboldening the very forces they are intended to suppress.
According to him, until there is a firm and principled resolve to confront these threats with clarity, consistency, and a sense of justice that honours the fallen, the fight against terrorism may, regrettably, remain an illusion—an unending mirage on the horizon of the nation’s aspirations.

Read the full statement:

For many who may not fully grasp what is cloaked beneath the seemingly benign phrase “terrorist rehabilitation policy,” as presently advanced by our security authorities, it may, at first blush, sound humane, even civilised. Yet, beneath that polished veneer lies a troubling paradox, one that continues to wound the conscience of a nation already wearied by grief.

In its stark and unvarnished reality, this policy translates into the granting of amnesty to individuals who, in times past, have slaughtered our gallant servicemen, executed defenceless citizens, razed homes to the ground, and plunged entire communities into unspeakable misery. These are not abstract actors in a distant narrative; they are the very architects of sorrow across our land.

What the Chief of Defence Staff now proposes, in effect, is that when any of these violent non-state actors surrender, the State should receive them, rehabilitate them, and in due course, reintegrate them into the very society they once set ablaze. It is a proposition that raises not only legal and moral questions, but also deep existential concerns about justice, memory, and the value we place on human life.

I write this morning from a heart weighed down by grief; grief that is no longer theoretical, but painfully personal.

Yesterday, at about 3 p.m., tragedy came knocking, not from afar, but through a familiar face. It was my driver, Mr Chinedu. Beyond his role, he is a man of rare decency, whose character has endeared him to my family. He hails from Ezeagu Local Government Area of Enugu State.

He called me on the telephone, his voice trembling, faltering under the crushing weight of a grief I had never heard from him before. Deeply alarmed, I asked, as gently as I could, “What is the matter, Chinedu?

With a trembling voice, he replied:
“Oga, I just received a message from the Military High Command… my first son- Jude osondu ude, a soldier awaiting his leutnant confirmation, posted to Katsina, has been killed by bandits. They said his body will be brought home immediately.”

In that moment, time seemed to stand still. Words failed me. The weight of that loss, the abrupt extinguishing of a young life in service to the nation, was simply too heavy to bear. I shut down for the rest of the day, retreating into the solitude of grief.

I did all I could to console him. Yet, in that moment of shared sorrow, one haunting truth lingered unspoken: that the very perpetrator of this heinous act, the bandit who murdered his son, may, under the current terrorist rehabilitation policy, one day be welcomed back, rehabilitated, and reintegrated into the same society his victim died defending.

That thought is not merely unsettling; it is profoundly disquieting.

It is in light of such painful realities that one is compelled to question whether the fight against terrorism, be it from Boko Haram insurgents, jihadist bandits, or other violent groups, can ever be decisively won under a framework that appears to blur the lines between justice and leniency.

A nation must, of course, uphold the ideals of humanity and redemption. But it must do so without eroding the sanctity of justice or diminishing the sacrifices of those who stand in harm’s way to protect us. When policies appear to reward impunity, they risk emboldening the very forces they seek to quell.

Until there is a firm, principled resolve to confront these threats with clarity, consistency, and a sense of justice that honours the fallen, the war against terror may, regrettably, remain an illusion, an unending mirage on the horizon of our national aspirations.

From the depths of my grieving heart, I extend my most profound condolences to Mr Chinedu and his family on this irreparable loss. May the Almighty grant them the strength to endure this sorrow, and may the soul of the departed young soldier find eternal rest in the bosom of the Lord. Amen.

Reform-Focused IGP Disu Applauded by Human Rights Lawyer

Titus Eleweke


Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has praised the Inspector-General of Police, IGP Olatunji Rilwan Disu, for initiating reforms within the Nigeria Police Force.
Ejiofor, in a statement issued on Wednesday titled “Midweek Musings: Tiger Base, Owerri, The Eye of the Storm: Restructuring Tactical Units Across the State, Among Other Reforms, as a Transformative Tempest Unleashed by IGP Olatunji Rilwan Disu, Heralding the Long-Awaited Rebirth of the Nigeria Police Force,” said IGP Disu has demonstrated preparedness and resolve.
According to him, in stark contrast to the past, the present leadership under IGP Olatunji Rilwan Disu has shown a commendable immediacy of action.
He said that within a remarkably short span, reforms have been initiated that far exceed public expectations.
The human rights lawyer noted that the narrative surrounding notorious formations, including Tiger Base, Owerri, and others of similar ill repute, is decisively shifting, as they are now being restructured.
He added that it would seem that, at long last, someone in authority is not merely hearing, but truly listening.
“One is tempted to ponder: should this trajectory be sustained, unimpeded by the familiar distractions of political interference, even for a year, the Nigeria Police Force may well witness a complete and remarkable restoration of its public image.
What the Inspector-General requires at this critical juncture is not cynicism, but constructive encouragement and unwavering public support. Nigerians must rally behind this renewed vision, confident that genuine reform, though long delayed, is not beyond reach,” he said.
Ejiofor further stated that there has long persisted a widely held conviction, particularly among discerning members of the public, that confidence in the Nigeria Police Force has not merely waned but has been profoundly eroded.
He observed that it is therefore unsurprising that many have maintained that, while the leadership of the Nigeria Police Force possesses the latent capacity to transform its battered image—from that of a notoriously compromised institution into a truly dignified and professional outfit—what had been conspicuously absent was the political will to wield the proverbial sledgehammer of reform.
“Yet, in what may well be described, without the slightest exaggeration, as a reformatory tsunami, the sweeping and far-reaching institutional changes currently being championed by the Inspector-General of Police, IGP Olatunji Rilwan Disu, signal a most refreshing departure. Evidently, he is no accidental occupant of office; rather, he appears to have assumed this role with clarity of purpose, strategic foresight, and commendable resolve.
“Who, until recently, would have believed that those once ‘forbidden zones’ within the policing architecture—infamous for the infliction of grave harm, systemic abuse, and egregious violations of citizens’ fundamental rights—would be restructured with such decisiveness? Places where, in some harrowing instances, innocent citizens were treated with a degree of expendability unbefitting of any civilised society, cut down without accountability, as though human life bore no greater value than that of common fowl.
“Today, however, the narrative is shifting. The notorious formations, including Tiger Base, Owerri, and others of similar ill repute, have been decisively restructured. One cannot help but observe, perhaps with a tinge of justified sarcasm, that the cries of the masses—so long ignored or conveniently dismissed by previous leadership—have suddenly acquired an audible resonance. It would seem that, at long last, someone in authority is not merely hearing, but listening.
“Contrast this with the not-so-distant past, where grave allegations made openly and publicly by a Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria were treated with astonishing indifference. In a widely televised account, a former governor, now a minister, recounted his deeply troubling encounter with a named police officer, whom he accused of leading a notorious killer squad in Rivers State. One might have expected such a weighty allegation to trigger an immediate and transparent investigation. Instead, it was met with a most disconcerting wave of institutional nonchalance. The accused officer, far from being scrutinised, continued to operate within the system, unperturbed and unaccountable.
“Such episodes can only be described as emblematic of gross institutional complacency, if not outright recklessness, deserving of rigorous interrogation.
“In stark contrast, the present leadership under IGP Olatunji Rilwan Disu has demonstrated a commendable immediacy of action. Within a remarkably short span, reforms have been initiated that far exceed public expectations. One is tempted to ponder: should this trajectory be sustained, unimpeded by the familiar distractions of political interference, even for a year, the Nigeria Police Force may well witness a complete and remarkable restoration of its public image.
“What the Inspector-General requires at this critical juncture is not cynicism, but constructive encouragement and unwavering public support. Nigerians must rally behind this renewed vision, confident that genuine reform, though long delayed, is not beyond reach.
“Furthermore, it is imperative that a comprehensive inventory be undertaken of the grievous infractions perpetrated within these now-defunct formations. Accountability must not be sacrificed at the altar of reform. Those who, under the guise of uniform, operated as instruments of terror must be called to account. Justice, after all, is the enduring foundation upon which institutional credibility is built.
“In conclusion, one can only urge the Inspector-General of Police, IGP Disu, to remain steadfast, resolute, and unrelenting in the discharge of this noble and proactive mandate. The road to reform is seldom smooth, but history invariably favours those who persevere with courage and integrity.”

Power Cut : First Power MD Accused of Blackmailing Journalist in Anambra

Titus Eleweke


The Enugu Electricity Distribution Company (EEDC), through its subsidiary, First Power Electricity Distribution Company (FpEDC), has plunged residents of Amudo Village, Awka, into prolonged darkness,allegedly as punishment for exposing an extortion scheme linked to the repair of a faulty transformer.
Mr. Okechukwu Okafor, Managing Director of FpEDC, reportedly stated during a recent interaction that he ordered the disconnection of electricity supply to over 100,000 residents as proof that the company did not levy customers for transformer repairs.
However, residents of the Amudo community maintain that they were compelled to contribute between ₦2,000 and ₦5,000—depending on the size of their homes or shops—to fund the repair of a transformer that had been out of service for more than three weeks.
Mr. Okechukwu Obeta, a journalist and resident of the community, undertook his civic responsibility to hold those in power accountable by reporting on the levies and documenting his own contribution. Several residents corroborated this claim, stating that an understanding had been reached with FpEDC management for the community to raise funds to fix the damaged transformer.
Mr. Afam Nwanna, Chairman of the village, confirmed that residents were levied but stated that the funds were intended for CCTV. This raises a critical question: did the Amudo community have an issue with CCTV installation or with a damaged transformer? The chairman should provide a clear account of the funds collected and the purpose for which they were collected.
Voice notes circulating online indicate that members of the Amudo community were asked to contribute between ₦2,000 and ₦5,000 to restore their damaged transformer. Insideoutnewsng.com investigation revealed that, during one of the meetings between First Power and the Amudo community, it was established that the community had raised ₦1.1 million, with an additional ₦1 million required to meet the total of ₦2.1 million. There is also evidence suggesting that electricity was restored immediately after the payment was made.
Given that this was presented as an unofficial process, requesting official receipts should not be contentious. It is, in fact, common practice that communities contribute to the repair of damaged transformers. It is also reported that First Power has constituted a probe panel to investigate Mr. Obeta’s report. If the company is genuinely interested in transparency, it should expand this probe to include residents across Anambra State to provide accounts of their experiences when transformers were damaged.
Recalled the Mr Izunna Okafor, the company’s Communications Manager, was quoted as sympathizing with residents over the blackout while advising them to raise the ₦2.1 million “as requested” to expedite the restoration of power.
“It is the responsibility of our company to replace the vandalised transformer, but if you wait for the company to act, it may not happen soon, and that could leave them in darkness indefinitely,” he stated.
Following the public exposure of this arrangement—which effectively shifted the responsibility for infrastructure repair from the company to consumers—the Managing Director allegedly ordered a fresh disconnection of power to the area. This action appears aimed at turning residents against the journalist and discrediting the report.
It is particularly troubling that a company which previously deployed various tactics—including alleged threats to prevent electricity consumers in Anambra from protesting poor power supply on March 14—would now admit to deliberately cutting power over a report it finds inconvenient.
Through this action, Mr. Okafor appears to have shifted attention from the company’s inability to provide consistent electricity to targeting Mr. Obeta as the supposed cause of the outage.
How does one explain a situation in which a service provider punishes over 100,000 innocent customers—while also forfeiting its own revenue—simply to intimidate a journalist and deflect from its operational failures?
If, indeed, EEDC or FpEDC did not directly or indirectly compel residents to fund the transformer repairs, a formal rebuttal or clarification would have sufficed. Instead, the decision to disrupt electricity supply represents a breach of trust and a violation of its contractual obligations to customers.
Reports indicate that Mr. Okafor has demanded that Mr. Obeta retract his story and issue an apology, despite substantial evidence that residents were required to contribute funds.
Disturbingly, the life and safety of Mr. Okechukwu Obeta now appear to be at risk, given the volume of threats he has allegedly received. He has reportedly filed complaints with the Anambra State Police Command and the Department of State Services (DSS), and is currently in hiding for fear of his life.
Mr. Obeta is widely regarded as a diligent and principled journalist who has consistently amplified the voices of underserved communities and driven meaningful change through his reporting.
It is unacceptable for any official to endanger the life of a journalist in an attempt to mask institutional failure. If Mr. Okafor claims that electricity cannot be supplied to Amudo Village because of a media report, how then does he account for persistent outages in Okpuno, Agu-Awka, Ifite, Amawbia, Udoka, and Ngozika Estates?
We call on the Anambra State Government—particularly the Anambra State Electricity Regulatory Agency—as well as the Department of State Services and the Nigeria Police Force, to urgently intervene. They must caution Mr. Okafor against further actions that undermine public trust and take concrete steps to ensure the safety and protection of Mr. Obeta and other journalists.
The role of the press in holding power to account is enshrined in Section 22 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and it must be protected at all costs.

Outrage as Ejiofor Condemns Alleged “Mass Rape Festival” in Ozoro

Titus Eleweke


Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has condemned what he described as an abomination—rape in Ozoro, Delta State.
He said it is regrettable that the Ozoro community in Delta State is alleged to have hosted a festival that provided a veneer of legitimacy for acts tantamount to mass sexual assault, noting that such conduct is not merely shocking but constitutes an egregious assault on the conscience of mankind.
Ejiofor, in a statement issued on Monday titled “Monday Musing: Culture Cannot Sanctify Crime, A Searing Indictment and an Unequivocal Condemnation of the Atrocities in Ozoro Community in Delta State,” stated that culture, in its truest and noblest form, ought to ennoble society, not degrade it.
He added that culture must civilise, not brutalise, and should protect, not violate.
According to him, it is both disturbing and profoundly disquieting that, in the twenty-first century—an era ostensibly defined by civilisation, human dignity, and the progressive abandonment of barbaric traditions—society must still confront allegations of cultural practices so grotesque that they affront the very essence of justice, decency, and humanity.
He said the reported incident in Ozoro, where a festival allegedly provided a veneer of legitimacy for acts tantamount to mass sexual assault, is not merely shocking but an egregious assault on the conscience of mankind.
“One is compelled to ask, with all the gravity the situation demands: does Ozoro exist outside the constitutional and administrative framework of Delta State? Is it a community detached from the reach of law and governance, or does it operate within a modern state bound by statutes that unequivocally criminalise acts such as rape and sexual violence? These are not rhetorical curiosities but pressing questions that strike at the heart of governmental responsibility.
“Where such abhorrent acts are alleged to occur under the guise of tradition, and without immediate and decisive intervention by relevant authorities, the spectre of state complicity—whether by omission or acquiescence—inevitably arises. Governance is not merely ceremonial; it is a solemn duty to safeguard lives, uphold rights, and ensure that no community becomes a sanctuary for lawlessness,” he said.
He said that it bears reiterating, with uncompromising clarity, that no cultural practice, no matter how ancient or deeply rooted, can legitimise what the law has expressly criminalised.
“Rape is not culture; it is a heinous crime. Sexual violence is not tradition; it is an atrocity. Any attempt to cloak such acts in the garb of heritage is a dangerous distortion that must be firmly repudiated,” he said.
Ejiofor added that he joins the civilised world in unequivocally condemning, in the strongest possible terms, this affront to human dignity.
He stressed that beyond condemnation, there must be swift, thorough, and transparent action.
He stated that a comprehensive investigation must be immediately instituted, with a view to identifying and prosecuting all those involved—organisers, enablers, and any individuals who directly or indirectly facilitated the reprehensible conduct.
“To remain silent, or worse still indifferent, is to betray the fundamental values upon which any just society is built. The law must speak—firmly, decisively, and without fear or favour.
“Let it be unequivocally stated: a society that tolerates the violation of its women under any pretext forfeits its moral authority and undermines its claim to civilisation. The time has come to draw a definitive line between culture and criminality. Traditions that offend natural justice, equity, and good conscience have no place in a modern legal order and must be consigned, without hesitation, to the annals of a regrettable past.
“Justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done. And in this instance, it must be done with the full weight of the law,” he said.

FirstPower’s Credibility Crisis Won’t Be Investigated Away

Titus Eleweke


FirstPower Electricity Distribution Company’s response to the Amudo controversy is telling ,not because it resolves the issue, but because it exposes a deeper problem the company appears unwilling to confront.
At face value, the company’s position is straightforward. It denies levying residents ₦2.1 million. It insists it spent ₦4 million to repair the vandalized transformer. It points to community leaders who now support its version of events. It highlights the journalist’s refusal to provide evidence.
On paper, that should settle the matter.
But in reality, it does not.
This is not simply a dispute between FirstPower and a journalist. It is a credibility test , one that goes beyond statements, meetings, and official denials. Because in Nigeria’s electricity sector, trust is not built on what companies say; it is shaped by what communities experience.
And those experiences tell a far more complicated story.
Across the country, there is a well-known, if rarely documented, pattern: when electricity infrastructure fails, communities often find themselves contributing money , directly or indirectly to restore power. These payments may not always be officially sanctioned, but they exist in practice. They thrive in the gap between policy and reality.
That is the context in which the Amudo allegation must be understood.
Residents had reportedly discussed contributing money for repairs even before any publication was made. There were cost estimates. There were suspicions of internal collusion following repeated vandalism. These are not details that emerge from nowhere.
Yet, after FirstPower’s intervention and notably, after a power outage that compelled the community to engage with the company the narrative appears to shift. The payments are reclassified as “voluntary,” now meant for security measures rather than repairs.
Such a sudden reframing does not inspire confidence. It raises a fundamental question: what changed the facts, or the pressure?
Equally troubling is the company’s handling of the journalist at the center of the story. Demanding that a reporter disclose sources is not accountability; it is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of how journalism works. Source protection is a cornerstone of credible reporting, especially in cases involving potential wrongdoing.
More concerning are the allegations of intimidation.
Claims that power was cut to compel attendance at a meeting, that community leaders were pressured to deny earlier positions, and that the journalist was threatened and asked to retract his story paint a picture that goes far beyond a simple fact-finding exercise. Even if FirstPower disputes these claims, the perception alone is damaging.
Because perception, in this sector, is everything.
For many Nigerians, the idea that a community could be asked to contribute money to fix a transformer is not shocking — it is familiar. That familiarity is what makes this case so serious. It aligns too easily with what people already believe about how electricity distribution operates.
This is where FirstPower is missing a crucial opportunity.
Instead of approaching the issue as a reputational threat to be contained, the company should see it as a systemic problem to be exposed and addressed. If it truly did not authorize any levy, then the possibility remains that such practices could be happening informally within its operational environment.
And if that is the case, internal denial will not solve it.
What is needed is radical transparency.
FirstPower should go beyond internal investigations and open its processes to public scrutiny. Publish repair timelines. Disclose contractor engagements. Provide verifiable records of who pays for what. Invite customers across Anambra State to report similar experiences without fear of retaliation.
Such an approach would do more to restore credibility than any number of press statements.
Because the truth is simple: trust in electricity distribution companies is already dangerously low. Years of estimated billing, erratic supply, and opaque operations have created a deep well of public skepticism.
Responding to allegations with defensiveness — or worse, perceived intimidation — only deepens that distrust.
FirstPower now stands at a crossroads. It can continue to challenge the messenger and control the narrative, or it can confront the uncomfortable possibility that something within its system is broken whether acknowledged or not.
If communities are indeed contributing money to fix infrastructure that companies claim is their responsibility, then this is not just a misunderstanding.
It is a systemic failure.
And no investigation, however thorough, will restore public confidence unless it is matched by openness, accountability, and a genuine willingness to listen to the people the company exists to serve.

FirstPower’s Credibility Crisis Won’t Be Investigated Away

Titus Eleweke


FirstPower Electricity Distribution Company’s response to the Amudo controversy is telling ,not because it resolves the issue, but because it exposes a deeper problem the company appears unwilling to confront.
At face value, the company’s position is straightforward. It denies levying residents ₦2.1 million. It insists it spent ₦4 million to repair the vandalized transformer. It points to community leaders who now support its version of events. It highlights the journalist’s refusal to provide evidence.
On paper, that should settle the matter.
But in reality, it does not.
This is not simply a dispute between FirstPower and a journalist. It is a credibility test , one that goes beyond statements, meetings, and official denials. Because in Nigeria’s electricity sector, trust is not built on what companies say; it is shaped by what communities experience.
And those experiences tell a far more complicated story.
Across the country, there is a well-known, if rarely documented, pattern: when electricity infrastructure fails, communities often find themselves contributing money , directly or indirectly to restore power. These payments may not always be officially sanctioned, but they exist in practice. They thrive in the gap between policy and reality.
That is the context in which the Amudo allegation must be understood.
Residents had reportedly discussed contributing money for repairs even before any publication was made. There were cost estimates. There were suspicions of internal collusion following repeated vandalism. These are not details that emerge from nowhere.
Yet, after FirstPower’s intervention and notably, after a power outage that compelled the community to engage with the company the narrative appears to shift. The payments are reclassified as “voluntary,” now meant for security measures rather than repairs.
Such a sudden reframing does not inspire confidence. It raises a fundamental question: what changed the facts, or the pressure?
Equally troubling is the company’s handling of the journalist at the center of the story. Demanding that a reporter disclose sources is not accountability; it is a misunderstanding or misrepresentation of how journalism works. Source protection is a cornerstone of credible reporting, especially in cases involving potential wrongdoing.
More concerning are the allegations of intimidation.
Claims that power was cut to compel attendance at a meeting, that community leaders were pressured to deny earlier positions, and that the journalist was threatened and asked to retract his story paint a picture that goes far beyond a simple fact-finding exercise. Even if FirstPower disputes these claims, the perception alone is damaging.
Because perception, in this sector, is everything.
For many Nigerians, the idea that a community could be asked to contribute money to fix a transformer is not shocking — it is familiar. That familiarity is what makes this case so serious. It aligns too easily with what people already believe about how electricity distribution operates.
This is where FirstPower is missing a crucial opportunity.
Instead of approaching the issue as a reputational threat to be contained, the company should see it as a systemic problem to be exposed and addressed. If it truly did not authorize any levy, then the possibility remains that such practices could be happening informally within its operational environment.
And if that is the case, internal denial will not solve it.
What is needed is radical transparency.
FirstPower should go beyond internal investigations and open its processes to public scrutiny. Publish repair timelines. Disclose contractor engagements. Provide verifiable records of who pays for what. Invite customers across Anambra State to report similar experiences without fear of retaliation.
Such an approach would do more to restore credibility than any number of press statements.
Because the truth is simple: trust in electricity distribution companies is already dangerously low. Years of estimated billing, erratic supply, and opaque operations have created a deep well of public skepticism.
Responding to allegations with defensiveness — or worse, perceived intimidation — only deepens that distrust.
FirstPower now stands at a crossroads. It can continue to challenge the messenger and control the narrative, or it can confront the uncomfortable possibility that something within its system is broken whether acknowledged or not.
If communities are indeed contributing money to fix infrastructure that companies claim is their responsibility, then this is not just a misunderstanding.
It is a systemic failure.
And no investigation, however thorough, will restore public confidence unless it is matched by openness, accountability, and a genuine willingness to listen to the people the company exists to serve.

Nigerian Army Brings Smiles to Ihiala Pupils with Books, School Bags

Titus Eleweke

The Nigerian Army has distributed school bags and exercise books to pupils of Ogwumabiri Primary School, Lilu, in Ihiala Local Government Area of Anambra State.
The initiative is aimed at giving the pupils a sense of belonging, inspiring them to pursue academic excellence, and fostering an atmosphere of camaraderie between the Army and the host community.
According to a statement issued by the military the gesture forms part of the Army’s Civil-Military Relations (CMR) activities.
He explained that, in line with its tradition of promoting academic excellence and strengthening civil-military cooperation, the Nigerian Army decided to put smiles on the faces of the pupils by distributing quality school bags and exercise books. The aim, he noted, is to encourage the children academically while deepening the bond between the military and the community.
Presenting the items on behalf of the General Officer Commanding (GOC) 82 Division, Nigerian Army, Enugu, Brigadier General S.A. Jimoh described the gesture as an act motivated by the Army’s belief that education is a lasting legacy and a vital tool for social engineering, economic well-being, and overall development.
He encouraged the staff and pupils of the school to make good use of the materials to improve their academic performance.
Furthermore, he assured the community that the Nigerian Army remains committed to providing maximum security—not only for the pupils but also for the entire community and the state at large.
Speaking to newsmen, the Deputy Director of Army Public Relations, 82 Division, Nigerian Army, Enugu, Lieutenant Colonel Olabisi Ayeni, emphasized that children represent the future of any society.
He noted that without development, there can be no lasting peace, which underscores the Army’s decision to invest in the education of the younger generation as future leaders.
He added that peace is gradually returning to the community and encouraged those who had fled due to insecurity to return to their homes.
In her response, the headteacher of the school, Mrs. Grace Nnubia, expressed gratitude to the Nigerian Army for the kind gesture and pledged to maintain high academic standards in line with the values associated with the Army.
The joyful expressions on the faces of the children as they received the items served as a clear indication of their appreciation.
The community also expressed gratitude, noting that the Army’s presence has revived social interaction and activities in what was previously a deserted area.
The event was marked by an atmosphere of joy, camaraderie, and celebration among the people of Lilu community, particularly the management, teachers, and pupils of Ogwumabiri Primary School.
Among the officers present at the event were Colonel Madaki Yakubu, Commander of the 302 Artillery Regiment (General Support), Onitsha, along with other senior officers from the 82 Division, Nigerian Army, Enugu.

Nigeria’s Legal Profession Slipping, Says Ejiofor

Titus Eleweke


Human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has raised alarm over the declining moral, ethical, and professional standards within Nigeria’s legal profession.
Ejiofor, in a statement issued on Wednesday titled “Midweek Musing: When Nobility Ebbs and the Bar Descends A Clarion Call to Rescue the Soul of the Legal Profession in Nigeria,” urged the Nigerian Bar Association, the Body of Benchers, and other relevant institutions to take urgent steps to salvage the noble profession.
Ejiofor, who holds the traditional title of Dunu-Ezeugosinachi, stated that not too long ago, there existed a defining era in Nigeria’s jurisprudential history when the legal profession stood not merely as a vocation, but as a sacred trust an honourable calling anchored in dignity, discipline, and an unwavering commitment to justice.
Regrettably, he said, that era has receded into memory and now remains only a shining benchmark in the annals of Nigeria’s legal heritage.
“It was, indeed, the age of giants an age exemplified by Chief Frederick Rotimi Alade Williams, the first indigenous Senior Advocate of Nigeria, whose forensic brilliance and courtly elegance set enduring standards. It was also the era of Chief Abdul-Ganiyu Oyesola Fawehinmi, whose courage and principled resistance to tyranny elevated the moral authority of the Bar and inspired generations.
“On the Bench, the judiciary was graced by intellectual titans: Justice Chukwudifu Akunne Oputa, revered as the ‘Socrates of the Supreme Court’ for his philosophical depth; Justice Adolphus Godwin Karibi-Whyte, known for the clarity and precision of his judgments; Justice Kayode Eso, a fearless guardian of constitutionalism; and Justice Muhammadu Lawal Uwais, whose tenure exemplified integrity and institutional strength.
“The profession has also been enriched, in its continuing evolution, by distinguished living legends such as Chief Afe Babalola, SAN; Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN; Chief Olisa Agbakoba, SAN; and Chief Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN,figures whose contributions have helped sustain the nobility and relevance of the Bar.
“In those halcyon days, the nobility of the legal profession was not symbolic; it was lived. Advocacy was an art, ethics a creed, and the courtroom a temple of justice where decorum, learning, and integrity were non-negotiable,” he said.

According to him, that noble standard now appears to be eroding at an alarming rate.
He noted that admission into the profession,once a rigorous process that tested both intellect and character risks becoming predominantly academic, with insufficient emphasis on moral and ethical grounding.
He said the consequences are both visible and troubling.
Ejiofor observed that a growing number of practitioners demonstrate diminishing familiarity with the refined language and discipline of the courtroom, replacing erudition with crudeness and precision with mediocrity.
“In some instances, courtrooms,once sanctuaries of reason have devolved into arenas of disorder, where conduct unbecoming of the profession occurs with little restraint.
“Even more concerning is the gradual reflection of these deficiencies within the judiciary itself. When individuals insufficiently grounded in the ethos of the Bar ascend to the Bench, the very foundation of justice is placed at risk. Inevitably, this raises a critical question: what quality of justice can emerge from such a system?
“A recent incident further underscores this concern. The exercise of judicial authority in ways that appear arbitrary,such as directing a legal practitioner to kneel in open court ,signals a troubling erosion of institutional decorum. While discipline in the courtroom is essential, it must always align with established legal standards and respect for professional dignity.
“Equally disconcerting is the increasing normalization of sharp practices within the profession. Procedural ambush, ethical compromise, and deliberate obstruction are, in some quarters, being deployed as litigation strategies.
“There are instances where even senior members of the Bar engage in conduct that undermines justice. Such conduct includes the filing of court processes and the deliberate removal to one’s chambers of all service copies intended for opposing counsel months in advance of the adjourned date, only to return to court on the day the matter is scheduled for hearing to effect service in open court,thereby frustrating and truncating the proceedings of the day.
“When objection is raised by opposing counsel, such a practitioner brazenly contends that the said counsel ought to have attended his chambers to collect the processes, and, in such circumstances, he regrettably enjoys the protection of the court. This is a personal experience.
“Such actions, whether isolated or systemic, represent not only professional misconduct but a direct affront to the administration of justice. When such behaviour is tolerated, or worse, shielded by rank, it fosters a dangerous culture where accountability becomes selective, eroding the moral fabric of the profession,” he stated.
According to him, this trend is unsustainable and, if left unchecked, threatens a systemic erosion of public confidence in the legal system,a consequence far more damaging than individual acts of misconduct.
The human rights lawyer stressed that the legitimacy of the law ultimately rests on trust, and once that trust is compromised, the very foundation of civil society is endangered.
The IPOB therefore called on the custodians of the profession to rise to the challenge.
“The Nigerian Bar Association, the Body of Benchers, the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, and the Council of Legal Education must take decisive steps to restore ethical standards, reinforce discipline, and uphold merit in the training, admission, and regulation of legal practitioners.
“The time has come to move beyond rhetoric to meaningful reform to recalibrate entry standards, enforce discipline without fear or favour, and revive the culture of excellence that once defined the Nigerian Bar.
“If the current decline is allowed to persist, history will render a harsh verdict: that a noble profession, once the conscience of the nation and a bastion of justice, was diminished through complacency and neglect,” he added.
He added that what is required to rescue the legal profession in Nigeria is courage,the courage to confront uncomfortable truths, enforce standards impartially, and insist that the legal profession must not merely exist, but must earn and sustain its revered place in society.

Why Nigerian Youths Are Turning Away From the Military — Ejiofor


Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has stated that Nigerian youths are unlikely to respond to calls by the military to enlist unless they are assured that their lives will be adequately protected while serving the nation.

Ejiofor made this known in a statement titled “Monday Musing: Recruitment by Compulsion or Reform by Conviction? Why Nigeria’s Youths Are Reluctant to Enlist in a War They Fear Is Already Compromised.”
According to him, young Nigerians will only begin to see military enlistment as a noble and meaningful path of national service when they are convinced that their lives will not be casually jeopardized by internal betrayal within the system.
He argued that when a young man watches news reports of soldiers,often newly recruited and barely trained being killed in ambushes before they can even defend themselves, such a person cannot be blamed for pausing to reconsider the wisdom of joining the military.
Ejiofor who is Dunu-Ezeugosinachi further stated that the reluctance of many youths to enlist in the army does not merely stem from indifference or a lack of patriotism. Rather, he said it reflects a lingering climate of fear, uncertainty, and distrust sentiments largely shaped by the disturbing realities unfolding within Nigeria’s various theatres of conflict.
He maintained that patriotism should not demand blind sacrifice in circumstances where systemic vulnerabilities remain unresolved.
“Across Africa, and even within the West African sub-region, many countries face insurgencies of varying degrees. Yet, the frequency with which Nigerian troops appear to fall victim to devastating ambushes raises legitimate concerns that cannot simply be dismissed as the inevitable cost of warfare,” he added.

The statement reads in full :
In recent days, statements emanating from the military high command have suggested a renewed determination to significantly increase recruitment into the Nigerian Army. Particular emphasis appears to have been placed on encouraging, and in some quarters almost compelling, young men from the South-East to present themselves for enlistment in the armed forces.

Ordinarily, the defence of one’s country ought to command the spontaneous patriotism of every able-bodied citizen. The military institution, in every civilised society should represent honour, sacrifice, and the noblest form of national service. Yet, in Nigeria today, the enthusiasm that should ordinarily accompany such calls to duty appears curiously muted among many youths.

Why?

The answer lies not merely in indifference, nor in a deficit of patriotism, but in a lingering climate of fear, uncertainty, and distrust, sentiments shaped largely by the disturbing realities currently unfolding within Nigeria’s theatres of conflict.

Across several regions of the country, jihadist insurgents and armed terrorist groups continue to prosecute a relentless and ferocious campaign of violence. From the forests of the North-East to the volatile plains of the North-Central, these non-state actors have demonstrated a capacity for sustained assaults against communities and, increasingly, against the very security forces charged with confronting them.

One of the most devastating features of this conflict has been the growing frequency of military ambushes.

Indeed, ambush attacks, once considered exceptional occurrences within the theatre of war, now appear alarmingly routine. Reports of soldiers and security operatives being caught in meticulously orchestrated traps have become distressingly familiar headlines.

Only two days ago, in Plateau state, more than thirty security personnel, including local vigilantes assisting the military, were reportedly killed when their convoy fell into a deadly ambush by armed insurgents. Sadly, this incident is far from isolated. The catalogue of similar tragedies continues to lengthen with unsettling regularity.

It is important to appreciate the nature of an ambush in military operations.

An ambush is not merely a chance encounter between opposing forces. It is a calculated and deliberate tactic. It occurs when hostile forces, armed with prior intelligence regarding troop movement, position themselves strategically along the anticipated route of their adversary, striking suddenly and with overwhelming surprise. In such situations, the element of surprise, rather than sheer firepower, often determines the outcome.

While soldiers may occasionally fall in open confrontation during exchanges of gunfire, it is frequently during these ambush scenarios that casualties become most devastating. Entire patrol units may be wiped out before they are even able to properly engage their attackers.
This raises a profoundly troubling question.
How do insurgent groups repeatedly obtain such precise information regarding troop movements?

Military analysts across the world will attest that successful ambushes are rarely accidental. They are almost always preceded by actionable intelligence, intelligence that must originate from somewhere.

It is therefore difficult to dismiss the growing suspicion among the public that internal compromise and information leakage within the security architecture may be contributing to these tragic outcomes.

If hostile elements consistently know when troops are moving, where they are headed, and which routes they intend to take, then it suggests that the problem may not lie solely in the forests where insurgents hide, but perhaps also within the very institutions tasked with confronting them.

And herein lies the psychological dilemma confronting Nigeria’s youths.

When a young man watches news reports of soldiers, often newly recruited and barely trained, being cut down in ambushes before they can even defend themselves, he cannot be blamed for pausing to reconsider the wisdom of enlistment.

Patriotism, after all, should not demand blind sacrifice in circumstances where systemic vulnerabilities remain unresolved.

Across Africa and even within the West African sub-region, many countries face insurgencies of varying degrees. Yet, the frequency with which Nigerian troops appear to fall victim to devastating ambushes raises legitimate concerns that cannot simply be dismissed as the inevitable cost of warfare.

For the average Nigerian youth contemplating enlistment, the question is painfully simple:

Will I be fighting the enemy alone, or will the enemy already know I am coming?

This crisis of confidence is perhaps the greatest recruitment challenge confronting the Nigerian military today.

The issue therefore extends beyond recruitment campaigns, public appeals, or rhetorical calls to patriotism. Trust cannot be commanded; it must be earned.

If the Nigerian state truly desires to attract the brightest and most capable youths into military service, then it must first address the perception, and perhaps the reality, that internal sabotage continues to undermine military operations.

Those who betray troop movements, leak operational intelligence, or compromise strategic plans are not merely disloyal officers. They are, in the truest sense of the word, the most dangerous terrorists within the system.

For an enemy outside the gates can be confronted in battle.
But an enemy hidden within the walls is infinitely more destructive.

The military high command must urgently embark upon a comprehensive sanitisation of its ranks, strengthening internal intelligence, rooting out compromised personnel, and restoring operational secrecy within the command structure.

Only when young Nigerians are convinced that their lives will not be casually jeopardised by internal betrayal will they begin to view enlistment once again as a noble and meaningful path of national service.

Until then, recruitment campaigns may continue to be announced with great enthusiasm.

But the silence of reluctant Nigerian youths will continue to speak louder than the bugle calls of enlistment.

Inside Police College Oji River: A Training Institution Left to Decay

Titus Maduako Eleweke

Police College Oji River in Enugu State is one of Nigeria’s ten major police training institutions. Established in 1972, the college specializes in the training of recruit constables for the Nigeria Police Force. Over the years, it has remained a critical center for producing officers expected to confront the country’s numerous security challenges.
The college trains recruit constables and contributes significantly to the manpower needs of the Nigeria Police Force. Ideally, such an institution should be modern, well-equipped, and maintained to a high standard, with an environment conducive to learning and professional development. Regrettably, the reality on ground suggests otherwise, as the college now resembles more of a punishment camp for trainees and instructors than a national training institution.
A recent visit to the college during the passing-out parade of 100 police personnel trained for the Anambra State Police Command would give any concerned observer sleepless nights. The college lacks many of the modern facilities expected in a public training institution. Numerous abandoned buildings and non-functional facilities dot the premises, reflecting years of neglect.
The state of the environment raises serious questions about whether the Federal Government fully appreciates the importance of the institution in shaping the mindset and professionalism of police officers who will confront the nation’s security challenges.
It is often said that a person is as good as the environment in which he or she is trained. If this maxim holds true, Nigerians should not expect anything exceptional from an institution operating under such deplorable conditions.
For instance, the lawn tennis court within the college has been overtaken by weeds. The squash court building is deroofed and surrounded by overgrown trees and grasses. Even the field where police trainees conduct drills and physical exercises is untidy and poorly maintained. It is difficult to imagine a training ground where even the football pitch is overgrown with weeds during the dry season.
Ordinarily, one would expect that, for the sake of training activities, the dry grasses would be trimmed and the field properly maintained to ensure a safe and suitable environment for physical exercises.
The Mammy Market within the college, which is expected to serve as a basic commercial and social center for trainees and residents, leaves much to be desired. Its condition hardly reflects what should be found in a modern training institution.
By every standard, Police College Oji River is a neglected institution and unfit for the training of police officers who bear the national badge and shoulder critical national responsibilities.
The roads within the college are hardly better than village farm roads, yet many families, including children, reside within the premises. The level of decay and dilapidation in the college is so alarming that it would not be unreasonable to close the institution temporarily for a comprehensive rehabilitation before reopening it for such an important national purpose as police training.
In many respects, the college resembles an abandoned Federal Government institution occupied by squatters, although the residents themselves are legitimate occupants.
Honestly, it is difficult to expect officers trained in such an environment to develop modern professional perspectives. The influence of the environment on trainees is unlikely to be positive.
No matter how much is invested in the curriculum or training programs, if the environment is not conducive, the likelihood of producing poorly prepared personnel for the Police Force increases.
However, there is some encouraging news. Reports indicate that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has set up a committee headed by the Governor of Enugu State to oversee the rehabilitation of the college. This development offers a glimmer of hope that the institution may soon receive the attention it urgently requires.
It is therefore important for the committee to step up action immediately in order to rescue the college from total collapse.
Investigations by our reporter also revealed that snakes and other reptiles are commonly sighted within the college, especially during the rainy season.
Disturbed by the level of decay and dilapidation, the Deputy Commandant of the college, CP Uduak Out Ita, called on the Anambra State Government and other governors in the South-East to come to the aid of the institution.
She urged them to assist the college in the rehabilitation of roads and other critical infrastructure.
Reiterating the Deputy Commandant’s appeal, the Commandant of the college, Assistant Inspector-General of Police Emmanuel Simon, also urged the Executive Governor of Anambra State and other South-East governors to take a special interest in the institution.
According to him:“It is our sincere appeal that the regional police college responsible for the training of police personnel who contribute to the safety of this region should be given urgent structural attention.”
He noted that the condition of the roads and other structures within the college requires immediate intervention to create a better learning environment and boost the morale of trainees.
When asked by our reporter what specific areas he would like the governors to focus on, he responded that they should first visit the college and assess the situation themselves.
“The governors should come and look at the structures first and know where to start. My speech is explicit on that,” he said.
The Anambra State Police Command spokesperson, SP Ikenga Tochukwu, in his opening remarks as Master of Ceremony during the passing-out parade, also called for improvements at the college.
According to him, the institution faces numerous challenges.
“We want to use Oji River as an opportunity to reach out to other authorities regarding the welfare of personnel and the condition of the college,” he said.
The Special Adviser to Governor Charles Soludo on Security, Air Vice Marshal Ben Chiobi (rtd), who represented the governor at the parade, expressed concern over the condition of the college.
Clearly disturbed by the environment, he reiterated the importance of a conducive training environment.
“The quality of the environment has a lot to do with the quality of the people trained there. You are as good as the environment where you are trained,” he said.
He commended the Commandant and Deputy Commandant for their efforts despite the difficult circumstances.
“I appreciate the Commandant and the Deputy Commandant. I know you are not swimming in wealth and riches here. It takes resilience and patience to continue working under these conditions,” he added.
If you want, I can also upgrade this into a stronger newspaper opinion/feature article version (more powerful, investigative, and publication-ready).

Human Rights Lawyer Ejiofor Nominated for Law Personality of the Year 2026

Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has been nominated for the Law Personality of the Year 2026 award.
The award ceremony is scheduled to take place on June 28 in Lagos State.
The honour is being conferred on him by the Organising Committee of the Eminent Man of the Year Awards & Fashion Show in recognition of his outstanding performance and contributions to legal practice.
In a statement issued by Ejiofor on Wednesday titled “Midweek Musing: Nomination , Law Personality of the Year 2026,” he described the honour as a recognition of his distinguished and unwavering commitment to the rule of law and the pursuit of justice in the country.
He stated:“As clearly indicated in their official letter of nomination, this honour is conferred in recognition of my distinction at the Bar, unwavering professional integrity, and notable contributions to the advancement of justice, the rule of law, and the growth of legal practice in Nigeria.”
According to Ejiofor, the nomination is both humbling and inspiring, and serves as a renewed call to greater service and deeper commitment to the noble ideals that define the legal profession.
Ejiofor, who holds the traditional title Dunu-Ezeugosinachi, further said:
“It is with a heart profoundly filled with gratitude and quiet joy that I respectfully notify my friends, admirers, Ezigbo Umuchineke, colleagues at the Bar, and my esteemed supporters of yet another humbling and superlative recognition.
I am pleased to announce that the Organising Committee of the Eminent Man of the Year Awards & Fashion Show 2026 has formally nominated me for the prestigious honour of Law Personality of the Year 2026.
June will soon be upon us, and preparations have already commenced. I therefore invite friends, associates, and well-wishers to begin getting ready, as all roads shall lead to Lagos on that special day for what promises to be a memorable and celebratory occasion.
Indeed, it can only be the grace of God. Without your unwavering encouragement, goodwill, and steadfast support, this recognition would not have been possible.
I remain profoundly grateful to you all for your continued support as we prepare to storm Lagos in grand style. Kindly take this as sufficient notice.
We continue to move forward.”

Mistaken $19,000 Payment Returned to Owner on Nnamdi Kanu’s Order,Ejiofor


The former lawyer to the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, and the lead counsel to IPOB, Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has stated that it is mischievous for anyone to claim that he was paid to defend Kanu.
Ejiofor explained that the purported $19,000 paid into his account was credited in error and was immediately transferred to the person for whom it was intended, based on the direct instruction of Nnamdi Kanu.
He further stated that on Monday he would publicly disclose full details regarding the $19,000 that was mistakenly paid into his account.
According to him, immediately the money was credited to his account, Nnamdi Kanu contacted him and informed him that the payment had been made in error.
Kanu subsequently instructed him on the account to which the money should be transferred, and he complied immediately.
On Saturday, a woman identified as Madam Nnennaya Anya, who claimed to be the Head of the Directorate of Finance of IPOB, said she paid $19,000 to Ifeanyi Ejiofor for his services to Nnamdi Kanu.
In a publication by the Daily Post online platform, the pro-Biafra organization dismissed Ejiofor’s claim that he did not receive payment for representing Kanu during his trial.
According to Madam Nnennaya Anya, she had earlier disclosed on Thursday that $100,000 was paid to Mike Ozekhome, SAN, and Ifeanyi Ejiofor while they served as Kanu’s lawyers.
Anya also released details on Friday of a ₦10 million payment allegedly made to Ejiofor through an “Office Manager.”
Again on Saturday, IPOB, through Anya, issued another statement titled: “Further Clarification on Financial Transaction: Confirmation of $19,000.00 USD Payment to Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor for Humanitarian and Advocacy Purposes.”
The statement read:
“In continuation of our commitment to transparency and accountability regarding financial matters related to the legal defense and advocacy for our Supreme Leader, Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, I, Madam Nnennaya Anya, in my official capacity as the Head of the Directorate of Finance for the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) worldwide, wish to provide this additional confirmation of a specific transaction.
“On the 9th of August 2021, shortly after the unlawful kidnap, torture, and extraordinary rendition of Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu from Kenya to Nigeria, he directly instructed me to effect a transfer of Nineteen Thousand United States Dollars ($19,000.00 USD) to Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor. This payment was duly executed as directed, for humanitarian and advocacy purposes in support of his legal representation and related efforts.
“The funds were wired from our account at Chase Bank in the United States directly into Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor’s USD domiciliary account at Fidelity Bank Plc, Lagos, Nigeria, under the beneficiary name ‘Ben I. Ejiofor & Company.’ The transaction reference included details for ‘Humanitarian And Advocacy Pymt’ with the reason stated as ‘Business.’
“Attached herewith is the authentic bank statement from Chase Bank, serving as irrefutable proof of this transfer, including the date, amount, beneficiary details, and the associated wire fee of $50.00 USD.
“This disclosure is made in the public interest to address and refute any assertions or denials regarding the receipt of professional fees or payments for services rendered in connection with Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s case. IPOB remains steadfast in ensuring that all facts are laid bare, countering misinformation, and upholding the integrity of our movement.
“We urge all stakeholders, supporters, and the general public to disregard any contrary claims and rely on these documented facts.”
However, Ejiofor has consistently maintained that his legal services to Nnamdi Kanu were rendered on a pro bono basis, stating that he neither requested nor received payment.
Reacting to the claims, Ejiofor issued a statement on Sunday titled “Important Clarification to Discerning Minds.” In the statement, he said that, for the sake of clarity and in deference to the truth, it had become necessary to place certain facts on record.
According to him, the payment in question was immediately retrieved by Nnamdi Kanu through a formal correspondence addressed to him, in which Kanu insisted that the payment had been made in error and was not for the purpose it was later alleged to represent.
He stated:
“Consequently, and strictly in compliance with his express instruction, the funds were returned on the very same day they were credited to my account. The account details of the proxy designated by him to receive the said sum were promptly provided, and the money was accordingly transferred back without delay.
“Furthermore, the instruction authorising the retrieval of the funds was expressly issued by Nnamdi Kanu through a communication that remains in my possession.
“For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of complete transparency, I shall, on Monday, publish both the transaction receipt evidencing the return of the funds and the account details of the proxy to whom the money was transferred. These documents will speak eloquently for themselves.”
Ejiofor also alleged that those making the insinuations against him are individuals who are corruptly enriching themselves through the Biafra agitation.
He assured the public that he would make available the instruction letter from Nnamdi Kanu directing him to transfer the money to the person for whom it was originally intended.
He reiterated that he never charged or received any payment to represent Nnamdi Kanu in court.

27 Dead:Ejiofor Warns of Alleged Forced Islamization,Levies in Adamawa

Titus Eleweke

Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has expressed deep concern over reports that armed jihadist militants descended on villages in Adamawa State in a brutal nocturnal assault that left no fewer than twenty-seven Christians dead.
In a statement titled “Weekend Musing: ‘Convert to Islam, Pay the Levy, or Abandon Your Ancestral Land’: Jihadist Terrorists Declare in Adamawa When Terrorists Issue Tax Notices and the State Appears on Administrative Leave,” Ejiofor lamented what he described as a disturbing situation in which terrorism appears to be assuming the role of a tax authority in some parts of Nigeria.
He described it as deeply troubling that bandits could reportedly issue ultimatums to indigenous Christian communities in Adamawa State, demanding that they convert to Islam, pay a religious levy imposed by the militants, or vacate their ancestral lands.
According to him, the Christian inhabitants were warned that they must either convert to Islam, comply with the imposed levy, or permanently abandon the communities their forefathers had inhabited for generations.
Ejiofor further stated that, most worrisome was the fact that the terrorists allegedly carried out their threats barely two nights ago, killing several residents as well as military personnel.
He noted that the incident represents yet another grim chapter in the unfolding tragedy across Nigeria’s North-East, where insurgent groups such as Boko Haram, ISWAP, jihadist bandits, and other allied militant factions continue to expand their theatre of terror with alarming boldness.
“Residents and soldiers were killed. Homes were set ablaze. More than one hundred civilians, mostly women and children, were abducted,” he said.
He added that as traumatised survivors in Madagali fled their homes and began counting their human and material losses, another disturbing report emerged almost simultaneously from Ngoshe community in Gwoza Local Government Area of Borno State.
Ejiofor who is Dunu-Ezeugosinachi also pointed to another dimension of the unfolding crisis, noting that the Israeli Ambassador to Nigeria recently alleged that Iran plays a significant role in the proliferation of arms and the sponsorship of jihadist terrorist activities in parts of Africa.
According to him, if such intelligence carries even a fraction of truth, Nigeria’s security establishment must treat the matter with the seriousness it deserves.

The statement reads in full:

WEEKEND MUSING

“CONVERT TO ISLAM,
PAY THE LEVY,
OR ABANDON YOUR ANCESTRAL LAND”:
JIHADIST TERRORISTS DECLARE IN ADAMAWA

WHEN TERRORISTS ISSUE TAX NOTICES AND THE STATE APPEARS ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE

Such was the chilling ultimatum delivered to Christian residents of Kirchinga and Garaha communities in Madagali Local Government Area of Adamawa State, shortly before armed jihadist militants descended upon the villages in a brutal nocturnal assault that left not fewer than twenty-seven Christians slaughtered.

It would appear that, in certain parts of our republic, terrorism has now acquired the bureaucratic elegance of a tax authority. One merely receives a notice: convert, pay, or vacate. Compliance is optional; survival, unfortunately, is not.

The attack, which occurred barely two nights ago, marks yet another grim chapter in the steadily unfolding tragedy across Nigeria’s North-East, where insurgent groups such as Boko Haram, ISWAP, jihadist bandits, and allied militant factions continue to expand their theatre of terror with alarming audacity.

Residents recount that the terrorists did not merely attack; they issued instructions.

The Christian inhabitants were warned that they must either convert to Islam, pay a religious levy imposed by the militants, or permanently abandon the communities their forefathers had inhabited for generations.

In other words, the victims were courteously offered three choices: apostasy, taxation, or exile.
The language may differ, but history recognises this script all too well.

As the traumatised survivors of Madagali fled their homes and counted their losses, both human and material, another disturbing report emerged almost simultaneously from Ngoshe community in Gwoza Local Government Area of Borno State.

There, armed fighters linked to Boko Haram and ISWAP reportedly stormed the settlement in large numbers, overwhelming a military position before sweeping into the town. The consequences were devastating.

Residents and soldiers were killed.
Homes were set ablaze.
And over one hundred civilians, mostly women and children, were abducted.

Thousands fled in terror, seeking refuge in neighbouring communities such as Pulka.

One must pause here to ask a question that has become painfully routine in Nigeria:

How does such a large force of insurgents mobilise, travel across territories, overwhelm a military position, abduct over one hundred civilians, and disappear into the night, apparently without prior detection?

This is not merely a tactical question.
It is a national one.

What makes these attacks particularly disturbing is not only their brutality but their scale, coordination, and confidence. Large columns of armed fighters move across vast terrains. Entire communities are invaded. Civilians are abducted in their hundreds. Yet the attacks often appear to occur with a curious degree of operational freedom.

It is a paradox Nigerians have grown accustomed to witnessing: the insurgents seem to possess remarkable mobility, while the state appears perpetually engaged in the post-event ritual of condemnation.

The question therefore persists:
How do these large armed formations assemble and move across vulnerable communities without early interception?

Until this question is confronted with sincerity and urgency, the nation may continue to witness tragedies that have become disturbingly predictable.

AN INTERNATIONAL WARNING

Adding another dimension to the unfolding crisis, the Israeli Ambassador to Nigeria recently revealed that Iran plays a significant role in the proliferation of arms and the sponsorship of jihadist terrorist activities across parts of Africa.

If such intelligence carries even a fraction of truth, then Nigeria’s security establishment must treat the matter with the seriousness it deserves.

Because if external actors are indeed fuelling insurgent violence within our borders, then the challenge confronting Nigeria is not merely insurgency. It is proxy warfare by other means.

What was once described as sporadic insurgency now increasingly resembles territorial intimidation and ideological domination.

For the communities of the North-East, the crisis has moved far beyond a security problem. It has become a daily test of the fundamental purpose of the state: the protection of its citizens.

Until that duty is discharged with clarity, competence, and resolve, Nigerians will continue to ask a question that grows louder with each tragedy:

Who truly controls the night in these territories: the state, or the insurgents?

Ejiofor Welcomes Egbetokun’s Exit, Calls It a New Dawn for Nigeria Police

Titus Maduako Eleweke

Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has described the departure of Kayode Egbetokun from the Nigeria Police Force as “the close of a chapter many would rather forget than footnote.”
In a statement issued on Wednesday and titled “Midweek Musing: When Tenure Outlives Trust — Egbetokun Years and the Crisis of Command,” Ejiofor offered a sweeping critique of the former Inspector-General’s leadership, arguing that his tenure was defined by deepening institutional distrust and unresolved structural deficiencies within the Force.
According to Ejiofor, the Police under Egbetokun’s watch grappled with persistent allegations of entrenched petty corruption, often rationalized as “field exigencies.”
He further alleged patterns of operational recklessness in crowd control and civil engagement, alongside what he described as a disciplinary architecture that appeared ornamental rather than functional.
He also pointed to opaque promotion and posting systems that, in his view, fueled perceptions of patronage over merit.
Such practices, he argued, weakened morale and undermined institutional credibility.
Ejiofor described Egbetokun’s extended tenure as controversial in both optics and internal morale, creating what he termed a “peculiar paradox” within the Force.
“Senior officers retired in sequence; contemporaries stepped aside; yet the apex remained immovable,” he noted.
He argued that in a disciplined hierarchy where progression is considered sacrosanct, such asymmetry inevitably breeds quiet resentment and suppressed morale among officers.
The human rights lawyer further observed that public commentary throughout Egbetokun’s tenure frequently lamented the persistence of “roadside taxation” under official uniforms, investigations allegedly susceptible to inducement, and selective enforcement in politically sensitive matters. He also criticized what he described as the inadequacy of transparent and independently verifiable accountability mechanisms.
“Such perceptions, whether universally fair or not, shape public trust. And in policing, perception is as consequential as performance,” he stated.
Looking ahead, Ejiofor urged the incoming leadership of the Police Force to resist cosmetic reforms and instead pursue substantive institutional rebuilding anchored on public trust.
He called for the publication of disciplinary outcomes, promotion criteria, and operational standards in accessible formats to enhance transparency.
He further advocated for a decisive end to what he described as an opaque patronage culture that corrodes morale and erodes professionalism within the Force.




The full statement reads:
MIDWEEK MUSING: WHEN TENURE OUTLIVES TRUST: EGBETOKUN YEARS AND CRISIS OF COMMAND.

The departure of Kayode Egbetokun from the helm of the Nigeria Police Force marks not merely the end of a tenure, but the close of a chapter many would rather forget than footnote. History, however, is rarely so indulgent.

His stewardship, prolonged beyond conventional expectations and defended with bureaucratic elasticity, unfolded against a backdrop of mounting public distrust, deepening institutional malaise, and a corrosion of professional ethos that had long been simmering beneath the surface. What was inherited as a fragile institution was not so much repaired as revarnished; and varnish, however glossy, cannot indefinitely conceal structural rot.

A Tenure Overshadowed by Institutional Fatigue

The Nigerian Police Force, even before this era, was no stranger to criticism. Allegations of bribery at checkpoints, investigative lethargy, politicised deployments, and opaque disciplinary mechanisms predated any single Inspector-General. Yet, leadership defines direction , and direction defines destiny.

Under Egbetokun’s watch, the Force grappled with persistent accusations of: Entrenched petty corruption masquerading as “field exigencies”; Operational recklessness in crowd control and civil engagement; A disciplinary architecture that often appeared ornamental rather than functional; and Opaque promotion and posting systems, which fuelled perceptions of patronage over merit.

One must ask , with no small measure of professional candour, whether institutional continuity was mistaken for stability, and longevity for legitimacy.
The extended tenure, controversial in both optics and morale, created a peculiar paradox. Senior officers retired in sequence; contemporaries stepped aside; yet the apex remained immovable. In a disciplined hierarchy where progression is sacrosanct, such asymmetry inevitably breeds quiet resentment and muted morale.

Institutional vitality thrives on renewal. When the upper echelons stagnate, initiative calcifies. Policy begins to wobble under its own weight. Innovation yields to caution; caution to inertia.

It would be historically incomplete, however, to suggest that decay was born in this era. The Nigerian Police Force has, for decades, wrestled with inadequate funding, welfare deficits, political interference, and inconsistent training standards. But leadership is measured not by the absence of inherited problems, but by the clarity and courage with which they are confronted.

Corruption within policing structures is not merely an administrative flaw; it is a constitutional contradiction. A Force empowered to enforce the law cannot be seen to commodify it. Where bail becomes negotiable currency, where investigation bends before influence, and where enforcement fluctuates with pecuniary persuasion, public confidence retreats into cynicism.

During this tenure, public commentary frequently lamented; The persistence of “roadside taxation” under official uniforms; Investigations susceptible to inducement; Selective enforcement in politically sensitive matters; The inadequacy of transparent, independently verifiable accountability mechanisms.

Such perceptions, whether universally fair or not , shape public trust. And in policing, perception is as consequential as performance.

With the reported appointment of Olatunji Disu as the incoming Inspector-General, the Force stands at a delicate inflection point. Inheriting a structure described by many as fatigued and reputationally bruised is no enviable task. Yet crisis, properly confronted, can become catalyst.

The incoming leadership must resist cosmetic reform. What is required is structural recalibration:
1. Radical Transparency
Publication of disciplinary outcomes, promotion criteria, and operational standards in accessible formats.
2. Merit-Driven Advancement
An end to the opaque patronage culture that corrodes morale.
3. Technological Accountability
Digital tracking of complaints, body, worn camera expansion, and independent audit frameworks.
4. Welfare Reforms
A demoralised constable cannot inspire public respect. Adequate remuneration, housing, and psychological support are not luxuries, they are safeguards against corruption.
5. Civic Re-orientation
The Force must re-learn that authority without courtesy is intimidation, and intimidation without legitimacy is instability.

Nigeria does not need a police force that salutes power and lectures the powerless. It needs one that understands that the uniform is not a costume of privilege but a covenant of service.

If the previous era taught us anything, it is that extended tenure does not equate to extended trust. Stability that does not produce reform merely stabilises dysfunction.

The Nigerian Police Force must decide whether it wishes to be feared, tolerated, or respected. Only one of these choices is compatible with democracy.

History will record the Egbetokun years. The question is whether the Disu years will merely annotate them or courageously depart from them.

Controversy Trails Akwa Ibom APC Congresses as Chairman,Party Chieftains Accused


But for the timely intervention of security agencies, bloodshed would have characterised the just concluded All Progressives Congress (APC) chapter congresses in some local government areas including Mkpat Enin, Esit Eket and other other LGAs, our Correspondent gathered at the weekend.

At the centre of the dispute, our Correspondent learnt, is the refusal of some key stakeholders in Mkpat Enin LGA, including the State APC Chairman, Obong Stephen Ntukekpo; the commissioner for works and political leader of the the zone, Prof. Eno Ibanga, and the House of Assembly member for the area, Hon. Uwem Imo Ita, who have been accused of failing to implement the party resolutions, because of allged vested interests.

"The decision from the party at the centre was that the former chapter Executive members should be returned, but the State Chairman of the APC, Stephen Ntukekpo; the Commissioner for Works, Prof. Eno Ibanga, and House of Assembly member, Hon. Uwem Imo Ita, met in Uyo to draw up a fresh list of executives without consulting critical stakeholders from Mkpat Enin," Comrade Ukpong Akpan, a youths' activist explained.

"The move has contradicted an earlier resolution reached by party leaders in the area to retain existing ward and chapter executives for another four-year term, because of their tested loyalty and performance," he recalled.

Sources within the party disclosed that prior to the February 18 and 21, 2026 congresses, an enlarged stakeholders’ meeting held on February 14 in Uyo had overwhelmingly endorsed the continuity of the current party structures.

The meeting, convened by the Executive Chairman of Mkpat Enin LGA and Local Government Coordinator of Party Affairs, Hon. Emmanuel Inyang, reportedly adopted a vote of confidence on the existing executives.

Prominent figures who endorsed the resolution of the meeting, it was learnt, included; Senator Ekong Sampson, Rt. Hon. Bernard Udoh, Hon. Otobong Ndem, Hon. Victor Ekwere, and council Chairman, Hon. Emmanuel Inyang.

Others were; former council chairmen; Hon. (Elder) Akparawa Udosam Umoatan, Hon. Ekanem Brown, Aniekpon Ekpo; South South Representative, North Central Development Commission, Obonganwan Rachael KufreAbasi Nse and Stakeholder and BoT Chairman, OML13, Mkpat Enin, Prince Nseobong Essien.

However, the alleged absence of Ntukekpo, Ibanga and Ita from that stakeholders’ meeting, and reports that they later compiled separate new lists in Uyo, ignited outrage among party faithful in Mkpat Enin, when stakeholders had agreed at a meeting that the current structures of the party, as duly constituted is tested, trusted, united and should be retained except, where there is need for changes or addition in the composition of the Excos at the congresses.

They further maintained that, the trio did not even adhere to the decision of the party that seven from the already existing 27 member party structures should be re-jigged with new members to accommodate the new entrants for equity, while 20 from the old Exco remained.

Party insiders claimed that as tension mounted at the congress venue, the trio hurriedly left the area and could not publicly present the purported list to the aggrieved members, thereby preventing what many feared could have degenerated into a violent confrontation.

Some party members accused Prof. Ibanga of introducing clannish considerations into party affairs, alleging that his actions were capable of destabilising the APC in Mkpat Enin barely months after joining the party.

Others argued that sidelining certain clans, including Ibiaku, in the distribution of party offices would amount to political injustice and exclusion.

And as such, Ikpa Ikono Clan has currently produced a senator; Ikpa Ibom Clan, the Local Government Chairman; Ukpum Minya has the State Chairman of APC, Commissioner for Works and Fire Service and House Member, while Ibiaku is zero, and it would be expedient for the position of Chapter Chairman of the party to be retained in Ibiaku Clan for equity and balance.

The fallout led to a boycott of the Saturday congress by several high-profile stakeholders, including former Deputy Governor Lady Valerie Ebe, former council chairmen and other senior party figures.

Amid the tension, Senator Sampson reportedly intervened to calm frayed nerves, assuring party members that their grievances would be addressed through appropriate channels.

He also commended Godswill Akpabio and Governor Umo Eno for their broader efforts at stabilising party structures across the state.

In contrast, party congresses in Ikot Abasi and Eastern Obolo LGAs, checks revealed, were conducted peacefully, with existing executives returned unopposed to serve another four-year term.

However, the protesters who stormed the Senate President Godswill Akpabio's Shelter Afrique, Uyo residence with their grievances were told to remain calm as their grievances would be communicated to the Senate President, who, according to his Personal Aide on Political Matters, was still in bed, but with a word of assurances that the anomalies would be corrected.

Cubana Group’s Delta Acquisition Not Under Litigation, Community Clarifies

Titus Eleweke

Members of the Ogbe-Ozoma Community in Delta State have dismissed as “laughable and misleading” a viral video circulating online in which certain individuals, claiming to be indigenes of Issele-Asagba, accused the community of unlawfully selling their land to Cubana Group.
In a statement issued on Thursday by the community’s lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor (KSC), the Ogbe-Ozoma Community maintained that the land currently under development by Cubana Group is legally owned, validly transferred, and free from any encumbrance, lien, or adverse claim under Nigerian land laws.
The community described attempts to link the property to unrelated litigation or an alleged consent judgment as misleading, defamatory, and calculated to create confusion.
It urged members of the public to disregard what it termed orchestrated statements driven by ulterior motives.
According to the statement, the land in question is not the subject of any pending litigation or consent judgment.


Clarification on Viral Video

“A few days ago, a viral video surfaced in which certain individuals, who purportedly claim to be indigenes of Issele-Asagba, accused our client, the Ogbe-Ozoma Community, of unlawfully selling their land to Cubana Group.
“In the course of the evident misrepresentations and misleading rhetoric that characterized the speeches in the said video, one Barrister Larry Oliseh, who now purports to act for the Issele-Asagba Community, asserted that the land in question is the subject of a consent judgment.
“This assertion, like the other statements made therein, warrants careful scrutiny in light of the facts and the applicable law,” the statement read.
Ejiofor noted that, given the speed at which unverified information spreads on social media, it had become necessary to issue a formal clarification.
He stated that his firm has acted as solicitors to the Ogbe-Ozoma Community, Okpanam Quarters, for over five years and is fully conversant with the history and facts surrounding the land. He said it was imperative to correct false and misleading narratives being circulated among the public.


The statement reads;

For the avoidance of doubt, we state as follows:

1. Ownership and Title:
The land upon which Cubana Group is currently undertaking development in Asaba, Delta State, forms part of the ancestral inheritance of the Ogbe-Ozoma Community, Okpanam Quarters, held by them from time immemorial. The said land was validly, lawfully, and legitimately sold by the community to Cubana Group, and title was duly transferred in accordance with all applicable laws.

2. No History of Litigation:
The said land has never been the subject of any dispute, litigation, or court proceedings before any court in Delta State or elsewhere.

3. Public Development:
It is to be observed that the flag-off of development activities by Cubana Group was conducted openly and was widely covered by members of the press, underscoring the transparency of the transaction and the ongoing development.

4. No Pending Action and Statutory Compliance:
There was no pending legal action before, during, or after the acquisition of the land by Cubana Group. Indeed, upon fulfilling all statutory requirements under the Land Use Act, Cubana Group was duly granted a Certificate of Occupancy in respect of the said land.

5. Distinction from Pending Suit:
The land purportedly referred to in the alleged consent judgment by counsel to Issele Azagba relates to an entirely different parcel of land, which remains the subject of litigation in Suit No. HCI/23/2021 pending before Onicha Ukpo High court, Issele-Uku Judicial Division,. We are counsel in that matter and can unequivocally confirm that it concerns a separate and distinct property.

6. Circumstances Surrounding the Alleged Consent Judgment:
It is particularly instructive that the same counsel now publicly asserting the existence of a consent judgment in favour of Issele Azagba, with respect to a property whose particulars and location are known to him to be entirely different in size and description, had previously acted for our client, the Ogbe-Ozoma Community, as defence counsel in the same matter wherein that purported consent judgment was procured.

During the pendency of Suit No. HCI/5/2012, the said counsel ostensibly connived with the then counsel for Issele Azagba to fabricate and file purported terms of settlement which were never brought to the attention of, nor authorized by, our client- the Ogbe-Ozoma Community, whom he represented at the time. It is our client’s position that certain signatures of persons unknown to the community, and in some instances not even parties to the suit, were forged, and that the document was surreptitiously filed and pronounced upon with unusual speed on the same morning it was filed in court as a consent judgment, without our client’s knowledge, consent, or participation in the proceedings of that day.

7. Steps Taken to Challenge the Judgment:
Upon discovery of the circumstances under which the said consent judgment was obtained, on land entirely different from the one presently sold to Cubana Group, our client promptly initiated appropriate legal processes to have the judgment set aside on grounds of fraud and fundamental procedural irregularities.

8. Subsequent Conduct:
It is equally noteworthy that upon being debriefed by the Ogbe-Ozoma Community, the same counsel, Bar. Larry Olise, proceeded almost immediately to institute further civil action on behalf of Issele Azagba seeking to enforce the said disputed consent judgment against our client. Our client has since taken decisive steps to report this conduct, considered unprofessional and unbecoming of a legal practitioner, to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) for appropriate investigation and disciplinary action.

9. Conclusion:
In summary, the land presently being developed by Cubana Group is free from any encumbrance, lien, or adverse claim. The attempt to associate it with unrelated litigation or a disputed consent judgment is misleading, defamatory, and calculated to cause confusion.

Members of the public are therefore advised to disregard such statements, which appear to be orchestrated in furtherance of ulterior motives.

The facts remain clear, verifiable, and legally defensible"

FG Urged to Reveal Names of Citizens in Detention

Titus Eleweke

Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has challenged the Federal Government to publish a comprehensive list of Nigerians currently held in detention across the country.

In a statement issued on Wednesday and titled “Midweek Musing: The Arithmetic of Abandonment ,Can the Government Still Count Its Captives? A Call for Candour on Nigerians Still in Kidnappers’ Dens,” Ejiofor called on the Federal Government, through the Office of the National Security Adviser and relevant security agencies, to release a detailed and verifiable statistical account of Nigerians presently held in captivity nationwide.

He urged the government to provide clear records indicating :The total number of persons currently in kidnappers’ dens;The number rescued within the past year;
The number confirmed deceased;
The number whose status remains unknown;The states and localities most affected; andThe operational measures currently being deployed to secure their release.

Ejiofor who is Dunu–Ezeugosinachi noted that transparency is not a sign of weakness but a fundamental instrument of accountability in a democratic society.
According to him, families of victims deserve the dignity of official acknowledgment and consistent updates regarding the fate of their loved ones.
“Even if their loved ones remain in captivity, they must at least know that the State has not consigned them to bureaucratic oblivion,” he stated.

He further argued that while government may face enormous security challenges, it owes citizens a minimum obligation of documentation and disclosure.
“A government that cannot protect every citizen must, at the very least, be able to count them. If we cannot secure them, can we not at least number them? Or has the arithmetic of governance also become a casualty of insecurity?” he asked.
Ejiofor’s call comes amid growing public concern over rising cases of abductions and insecurity across various parts of the country, with many families reportedly left without reliable information about the status of abducted relatives.


Read the full statement:


MIDWEEK MUSING THE ARITHMETIC OF ABANDONMENT:CAN THE GOVERNMENT STILL COUNT ITS CAPTIVES ?
A Call for Candour on Nigerians Still in Kidnappers’ Dens

Is it now heretical to enquire whether the Government has lost count of the very citizens it is constitutionally bound to protect? Or are we to assume that statistics, like the victims themselves, have simply vanished into the forests?

Under the grundnorm of our country, the sacred foundation upon which our constitutional democracy rests, the raison d’être of government is unmistakably clear. The social contract between the State and the citizen is not ornamental prose; it is a solemn covenant. Citizens surrender certain freedoms and entrust sovereign authority to government in exchange for security, order, and protection. Of these obligations, none is more pivotal than the protection of life and property.

Yet, across the length and breadth of the Federation, kidnapping has metastasised into a grotesque industry. From agrarian communities to bustling townships, no demography is spared. Only yesterday, reports emerged of another brazen attack in Abia State, where jihadist terrorist reportedly abducted residents and razed property. A fortnight ago, the nation recoiled at a chilling video displaying over 170 captives said to have been taken from Woro community in Kwara State , their abductors not merely committing crime, but curating theatre.

The audacity is as disturbing as the violence. These criminals do not merely operate in shadows; they taunt, they publicise, and they mock. They release videos as though issuing quarterly performance reports, while the State appears content to issue press statements of “ongoing efforts.” One is tempted , albeit reluctantly, to ask whether the kidnappers now possess a more reliable database of Nigerians in captivity than the institutions funded to prevent such captivity.

Consider the sequence in Kaduna State: after the ceremonious reception of 183 worshippers who regained their freedom, relief and applause briefly filled the air. Yet scarcely had the echoes of celebration faded before fresh abductions were reported in the same state. In Enugu, Katsina, Benue, Adamawa, Niger, and Borno, similar narratives persist, communities attacked, families shattered, numbers announced, numbers forgotten. The list grows; the accounting appears not to.

This is not a partisan lamentation. It is a constitutional enquiry.

I therefore respectfully call upon the Federal Government of Nigeria, particularly through the Office of the National Security Adviser and the relevant security agencies, to publish a comprehensive and verifiable statistical account of Nigerians presently held in captivity across the Federation.

Let the nation know: the total number of persons currently in kidnappers’ dens; the number rescued within the past year; the number confirmed deceased; the number whose status remains unknown; the states and localities most affected; the operational measures presently deployed for recovery.

Transparency is not an act of weakness; it is an instrument of accountability. Families of victims deserve the dignity of acknowledgment. Even if their loved ones remain in captivity, they must at least know that the State has not consigned them to bureaucratic oblivion.

A government that cannot protect every citizen must, at the very least, be able to count them.

If we cannot secure them, can we not at least number them? Or has the arithmetic of governance also become a casualty of insecurity?

History will judge not merely the ferocity of criminal gangs, but the fortitude, or otherwise , of those entrusted with sovereign power. Silence is not strategy. Opacity is not security. And statistics withheld are trust eroded.

The Nigerian people do not ask for rhetoric. They ask for truth.

And truth, like security, is not optional in a constitutional democracy.

Ejiofor Defends U.S. Troop Presence in Nigeria, Says Critics Fear Exposure

Titus Eleweke South East Editor

Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has described the recent deployment of United States troops to Nigeria following bilateral security engagements with the Federal Government as a positive development for the country.
In a statement issued on Monday and titled “MONDAY MUSING: WHEN ALLIES ARRIVE — WHY THE DEPLOYMENT OF UNITED STATES TROOPS SIGNALS A TURNING POINT IN NIGERIA’S WAR AGAINST TERROR,” Ejiofor said the engagement represents a significant step in the right direction.

He criticised individuals opposing the Nigeria–United States security collaboration, expressing hope that the partnership would help expose those responsible for the spate of killings across the country.
According to him, if the deployment of foreign ground forces serves as a deterrent against terrorist networks, then it is a welcome and necessary intervention.
Ejiofor who is Dunu–Ezeugosinachi noted that the reported arrival of experienced American troops,supported by advanced logistical capabilities and operational resources,signals not merely military reinforcement but a demonstration of strategic seriousness. He added that the move indicates that insecurity in Nigeria is no longer viewed as a domestic challenge alone, but as a destabilising phenomenon with regional and global implications.
“Security collaboration between sovereign nations is neither novel nor sinister,” “It forms the foundation of contemporary counter-terrorism operations. The alliance between the United States and several African nations in confronting insurgent networks is well documented. Why, then, should Nigeria be treated as an exception, particularly when the scale of bloodshed has reached intolerable proportions?”he stated.
The human rights lawyer further argued that the collaboration has the potential to strengthen intelligence gathering and operational precision; disrupt terror-financing networks; expose enablers and logistical backers operating behind carefully curated façades; curb incessant attacks on defenceless worshippers and rural communities; and restore confidence in the State’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force.

He observed that the swift and vocal objections from certain ideological quarters have been particularly revealing.
According to Ejiofor, some fundamentalist voices,whose doctrinal rigidity, he suggested, has often coincided with escalating insecurity are now demanding exhaustive details of bilateral security arrangements and, in some instances, declaring the collaboration “unacceptable.”

He maintained that Nigeria’s prolonged insecurity has regrettably been exploited for political gain.
“Fear has been monetised. Outrage has been curated. Tragedy has been rehearsed,” he said.
According to him, the time has come to end the cynical weaponisation of bloodshed for sectarian advantage or ideological posturing.

Ejiofor added that if the collaboration with the United States succeeds in exposing not only the foot soldiers of terror but also their financiers, recruiters, propagandists, and ideological incubators, it will amount to far more than a military intervention. Rather, he argued, it would signify the dismantling of an entrenched ecosystem of violence,an outcome he suggested may explain the discomfort in certain quarters.
He added that if the deployment contributes to reducing incessant attacks on vulnerable communities, securing citizens of all faiths, and restoring deterrence against terrorist networks, it will indeed mark a decisive and commendable step forward.
“History,” he said, “will not remember those who issued the loudest objections, but those who stood firmly for the protection of human life.”


The full statement reads:

There are moments in the life of a nation when rhetoric must finally give way to resolve. The recent deployment of troops from the United States of America, following bilateral security engagements with the Federal Government of Nigeria, appears to mark one such moment.

For years, Nigerians, particularly vulnerable Christian communities in parts of Kaduna, Plateau, Benue, Niger and other affected states , have endured a cycle of carnage so relentless that it risks becoming normalised. Churches attacked during worship. Villages razed in the dead of night. Innocent citizens abducted and paraded in macabre propaganda videos by marauding extremists. And yet, in the face of this grim reality, we have often been treated to familiar refrains: “The situation is under control.” One is tempted to ask — under whose control?

The reported arrival of experienced American ground troops, supported by logistical capabilities and operational resources, signals not merely military reinforcement but strategic seriousness. It suggests that insecurity in Nigeria is no longer to be viewed as an unfortunate domestic inconvenience, but as a destabilising phenomenon with regional and global implications.

Security collaboration between sovereign nations is neither novel nor sinister. It is the very architecture upon which contemporary counter-terrorism operations are built. The alliance between the United States and various nations across Africa in confronting insurgent networks is well documented. Why then should Nigeria be treated as an exception, particularly when the scale of bloodshed has reached intolerable proportions?

If anything, this collaboration has the capacity to:Strengthen intelligence gathering and operational precision;Disrupt terror financing networks;Expose enablers and logistical backers operating behind carefully curated façades; Curtail incessant attacks on defenceless worshippers and rural communities; and Restore confidence in the State’s monopoly of legitimate force.

What has proved particularly revealing, however, is the swift and animated objection from certain ideological quarters. Some fundamentalist voices, whose doctrinal rigidity has too often coincided with escalating insecurity, now demand exhaustive details of bilateral security arrangements and, in some instances, declare the collaboration “unacceptable.”

Unacceptable?

One must admire the audacity. For years, innocent Nigerians have been unacceptable collateral. Worshippers have been unacceptable targets. Entire communities have been unacceptable casualties. Yet it is the prospect of international cooperation to curb these atrocities that suddenly triggers constitutional purism and procedural anxiety.
It is legitimate to scrutinise foreign military presence. It is prudent to insist upon sovereignty safeguards. But it is disingenuous to weaponise sovereignty as a shield for impunity, or worse, as a bargaining chip for political relevance.

Nigeria’s prolonged insecurity has, regrettably, been exploited as political capital. Fear has been monetised. Outrage has been curated. Tragedy has been rehearsed. The time has come to halt the cynical weaponisation of bloodshed for sectarian leverage or ideological posturing.

If the collaboration with the United States succeeds in exposing not only the foot soldiers of terror but also the financiers, recruiters, propagandists and ideological incubators behind them, then it will represent far more than a military intervention. It will mark the dismantling of an ecosystem of death.

And perhaps that prospect explains the discomfort in certain circles.

If this deployment contributes to minimising incessant attacks on Christian communities, securing vulnerable populations of all faiths, and restoring deterrence against terror networks, then it is indeed a step in the right direction.

History will not remember who issued the loudest objections. It will remember who stood for the protection of human life.

Power Over People: Nigerian Politicians Ignore 400 Deaths in a Week ,Ejiofor



Titus Eleweke


Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and Lead Counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has expressed deep concern over the killing of more than 400 Nigerians within a single week, lamenting what he described as the political leadership’s alarming indifference to the scale of the tragedy.
Ejiofor decried the fact that, rather than urgently addressing the worsening insecurity responsible for these deaths, Nigeria’s political class appears preoccupied with strategising for victory in the 2027 general elections.
The lawyer made these remarks in a statement released on Saturday, titled “Weekend Musing: When the State Negotiates with Terror and Campaigns on Corpses.”
“Nigeria has lost well over 400 prospective voters in a single week,” “Four hundred citizens who might have queued peacefully in 2027 now lie in shallow graves. As the attacks continue, one is compelled to ask: how many Nigerians will still be alive to exercise their franchise by 2027, if death continues to enjoy such unfettered electoral advantage?”Ejiofor stated.
He recalled that only days earlier, the Governor of Kaduna State, Senator Uba Sani, was broadcast nationally welcoming and celebrating the “release” of 183 abducted worshippers.
According to Ejiofor, the public might be forgiven for mistaking the spectacle for a diplomatic triumph, until it is remembered that the abductors’ initial demand was a relatively modest ₦28 million, reportedly claimed as compensation for damaged motorcycles, before negotiations progressed to what was described as “serious business.”
“Today, we are told—without explanation—that the captives regained their freedom through the ‘efforts’ of the Office of the National Security Adviser and the Department of State Services,” “How many terrorists were neutralised in this operation? None are named. None are paraded. None are prosecuted.”he said.
He added that the captives returned “newly clothed, well presented,” while Nigerians were subtly cautioned against asking what sums may have exchanged hands.
“One suspects,” Ejiofor continued, “that the truth will only surface when these merchants of terror decide to weaponise it.”
The human rights lawyer further argued that there has been no moment in Nigeria’s political history when the sovereignty of the state has been subjected to such a sustained, organised, and unapologetically destructive assault as the one currently unfolding.
“What distinguishes this moment,” he said, “is not merely the scale of the carnage, but the chilling predictability of the state’s response—or, more accurately, its ritualised indifference.”
While insecurity ravages the North-West, North-Central, and North-East, Ejiofor noted that Nigeria’s political elite appears engrossed in an entirely different project.
According to him, the Senate is preoccupied with “brazen and diversionary manoeuvres” designed to undermine the Electoral Act, rehearse the choreography of electoral manipulation ahead of 2027, and facilitate mass defections into what increasingly resembles a one-party state
The time for euphemisms is over. Nigeria requires an immediate, uncompromising national security emergency declaration, followed by decisive, transparent, and ruthless dismantling of these terror networks. Not tomorrow. Now. Because death has become so routine that it is now reduced to statistics, and statistics, as history teaches us, are the final stage before conscience collapses.

Read parts of the statement:

"The pattern is now tediously familiar. Terror strikes. Lives are extinguished. Communities are erased. The Presidency issues a solemnly worded press statement, condemning the attack, sympathising with the bereaved, mourning the voiceless dead, and, as if by incantation, announces the “deployment of security forces.” The curtain then falls. The cycle ends. Until the next massacre.

While Nigeria bleeds under a coordinated onslaught by bandit–jihadist terror networks, its political leadership appears curiously preoccupied, not with saving lives, but with perfecting defections, rehearsing electoral manipulations, and choreographing a glide into a one-party state. This is not merely a failure of governance; it is a masterclass in state acquiescence to mass death.

One is compelled to ask: if the Nigerian state is not complicit by conduct, omission, or deliberate acquiescence, what becomes of the intelligence warnings routinely issued ahead of these attacks? Why are the monsters not intercepted before they strike? Why do they move with uncanny precision, unchallenged and unhindered, save perhaps by those within the security architecture whose silence is more eloquent than words?

Pause, truly pause, and consider this: how is it that nearly every major terrorist operation succeeds, cleanly and conclusively, without resistance, interception, or consequence? Is this operational genius, or institutional connivance?

Yet, even as jihadist terror sweeps through the North-West, North-Central, and North-East, Nigeria’s political class appears enthralled by a different project altogether. The Senate busies itself with brazen, diversionary manoeuvres aimed at subverting the Electoral Act, rehearsing the choreography for the rigging of the 2027 general elections, and perfecting a mass defection into what increasingly resembles a one-party state.

For context, lest we forget priorities; Nigeria has lost well over 400 prospective voters in a single week. Four hundred citizens who might have queued peacefully in 2027 now lie in shallow graves. And as the attacks continue, one wonders,how many Nigerians will still be alive to exercise their franchise by 2027, if death continues to enjoy such unfettered electoral advantage?

Only days ago, the Governor of Kaduna State, Senator Uba Sani, was broadcast nationally welcoming and celebrating the “release” of 183 abducted worshippers. One might be forgiven for mistaking the spectacle for a diplomatic triumph, until one recalls that the abductors’ initial demand was a modest ₦28 million, ostensibly compensation for damaged motorcycles, before negotiations could proceed to “serious business.”

Today, we are told, without explanation, that the captives have regained freedom through the “efforts” of the Office of the National Security Adviser and the Department of State Services. How many terrorists were neutralised in this operation? None are named. None are paraded. None are prosecuted. The captives return, newly clothed, well-presented, and we are politely advised not to ask what sums may have changed hands. One suspects that the truth will only surface when these terror merchants decide to weaponise it.

Meanwhile, the people of Woro Community in Kwara State announce, publicly and desperately, that they are exhausted from burying their dead. Community figures place the death toll at over 300, a figure far removed from the sanitised arithmetic of officialdom. These were Nigerians. Indigenous people. Christians and Muslims alike. Voters, many, perhaps, loyal affiliates of the ruling party. Their crime was existing.

Almost concurrently, Benue State burns. In Gwer West Local Government, government sources timidly admit to 20 lives lost in a market shooting. Twenty voters whose PVCs will never again be required. While the dead are still being counted in Benue, Katsina erupts, with over twenty more citizens slaughtered, triggering public protests that speak louder than any official condolence.

And through it all, the political elite remain steadfastly focused, receiving defectors, manipulating statutes, and plotting electoral dominance, as though governance were a private inheritance rather than a public trust.

So, one must ask: with this velocity of killing, is the survival of Nigerians now subordinate to the survival of political ambition? Is the primary duty of the state; security of life, now a negotiable afterthought?

Why, for instance, does the Federal Government deploy battalions of soldiers to Woro community after they have been decimated? Why is protection retroactive? If intelligence existed, as we are repeatedly told, would a fraction of those troops not have saved hundreds of lives before the bloodletting?
Are soldiers now assigned to guard graveyards and deserted villages, offering security to silence?
Has the Nigerian state, perhaps subconsciously, accepted the superior firepower of bandit-jihadist networks, now financially fortified by ransoms, often paid, directly or indirectly, by the same government sworn to defeat them?
Today, Nigeria sleeps with one eye closed, not from caution, but from exhaustion.

Ejiofor: Killing of 162 Civilians in Kwara Was a Calculated, Ideological Attack





Titus Eleweke



Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and Lead Counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has described the killing of over 162 innocent Nigerians in Woro Village, Kwara State, as not merely a tragedy but a monumental moral collapse of the Nigerian state.
In a strongly worded statement issued on Thursday and titled “A Nation Bleeding: The Genocidal Massacre of Over 162 Innocent Citizens in Kwara State and the Urgent Need for Immediate State Action,” Ejiofor said Nigeria must confront the disturbing question of whether the lives of its citizens still hold any value within the corridors of power.
According to him, when death on such a massive scale becomes possible, predictable, and recurrent, the failure can no longer be described as accidental. Rather, it is systemic, profound, and deeply shameful.
Ejiofor condemned, in the strongest and most unequivocal terms, what he described as the barbaric and genocidal massacre of over one hundred and sixty-two innocent Nigerians in Woro Village, allegedly carried out by armed bandits and jihadist terrorists.
Ejiofor who is Dunu-Ezeugosinachi, Oraifite stressed that the atrocity represents far more than a breakdown of Nigeria’s security architecture.
“The incident constitutes a crime against humanity, an unambiguous act of terrorism, and a damning indictment of the Nigerian state’s inability or worse, unwillingness to safeguard human life,” he said.
The human rights lawyer called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to urgently invoke his constitutional powers to declare a state of emergency in Kwara State, arguing that the gravity of the situation leaves no room for hesitation.
“The delay in taking decisive action is long overdue. This is not a political manoeuvre, but a moral, constitutional, and existential necessity,” “The scale, coordination, and sheer savagery of this massacre incontrovertibly demonstrate that conventional security responses have failed. Extraordinary threats demand extraordinary action.”Ejiofor stated.
He further rejected any attempt to characterise the killings as random or spontaneous criminal violence, insisting that the attack was deliberate, calculated, ideologically driven, and terror-induced.
“This massacre bears the unmistakable hallmarks of jihadist expansionism steadily encroaching upon western Nigeria and other parts of the country,” “To trivialise or sanitise such horrors under the convenient label of ‘banditry’ is to insult the memory of the dead and embolden the perpetrators of these crimes.”Ejiofor warned.


The statement reads:

There comes a moment when casualty figures cease to be statistics and become an indictment. Woro Village marks such a moment. The killing of over 162 innocent Nigerians is not merely a tragedy; it is a moral collapse. It is the point at which a nation must confront the unbearable question of whether the lives of its citizens still carry weight in the councils of power. When death on this scale becomes possible, predictable, and recurrent, the failure is no longer accidental, it is systemic, profound, and shameful.

I condemn, in the strongest, clearest, and most unequivocal terms, the barbaric and genocidal massacre of over one hundred and sixty-two innocent Nigerians in Woro Village, Kwara State, carried out by armed bandits and jihadist terrorists. This heinous atrocity goes far beyond a failure of security architecture; it constitutes a crime against humanity, an unambiguous act of terrorism, and a damning indictment of the state’s inability, indeed, unwillingness, to safeguard human life.

That defenceless men, women, and children could be methodically slaughtered in such staggering numbers within a sovereign republic ought to jolt the conscience of the nation to its very foundations. We have crossed a perilous moral threshold. The grim arithmetic of death has become routine. The counting of corpses is now treated as an administrative exercise. What was once shocking has become familiar. This is a national tragedy of the highest order, and it is wholly unacceptable.

Let it be stated plainly and without euphemism: this was neither random violence nor a spontaneous outbreak of criminality. It was calculated, ideologically driven, and terror-induced. It bears the unmistakable hallmarks of jihadist expansionism steadily encroaching upon western Nigeria other parts of the country. To trivialise or sanitise such massacres under the convenient label of “banditry” is to insult the memory of the dead and embolden those who perpetrate these crimes.

Nigeria now stands accused, not merely by its citizens, but by history itself, of counting the deaths of its own people through denial, inertia, and fatal hesitation. When more than 160 lives can be extinguished in a single community and the nations responds with bureaucratic platitudes, and weary resignation, then the sanctity of human life has been dangerously devalued.

This moment calls not for rhetoric, but for resolve; not for condolences, but for courage; not for routine responses, but for decisive and extraordinary measures.

Accordingly, I call upon the President to urgently invoke his relevant constitutional powers to declare a state of emergency in Kwara State. The gravity of the situation unmistakably demands such decisive action, and the delay in doing so is now long overdue, though not as a political manoeuvre, but as a moral, constitutional, and existential necessity. The scale, coordination, and savagery of this massacre incontrovertibly demonstrate that ordinary security responses have failed. Extraordinary threats demand extraordinary action.

Furthermore:
1. There must be an urgent and reinforced deployment of security and intelligence assets to Kwara State and its adjoining regions.
2. A transparent, independent, and time-bound investigation must be conducted, with its findings made public.
3.The Federal Government must abandon evasive language and formally acknowledge the terrorist and ideological character of these attacks, confronting them with the seriousness they demand.
4.The families of the victims must receive immediate humanitarian relief, adequate compensation, and sustained long-term support, far beyond perfunctory expressions of sympathy.

Let it be understood: silence in the face of mass slaughter is no longer neutrality. Minimisation is no longer caution. Bureaucratic language is no longer restraint. They have all become forms of complicity.

Nigeria must now decide, urgently, clearly, and without moral ambiguity, whether the lives of its citizens still matter. History will show no mercy to indifference, and posterity will not absolve excuses.

The dead of Woro Village demand more than tears.
They demand truth.
They demand courage.
They demand action—now.

Onitsha South Councillors,Stakeholders Endorse Emeka Orji for Second Term

Titus Eleweke

The councillors and critical stakeholders of Onitsha South Local Government Area have unanimously adopted and endorsed the Mayor of the Council, Hon. Emeka Joseph Orji, for a second term in office.
This collective decision followed a comprehensive review of his performance in office and a broad consensus that he should be given the opportunity to consolidate and complete the numerous people-oriented projects and reforms initiated under his administration.
In a communiqué issued by the Onitsha South Congress of Councillors after its meeting held on January 31, 2025, the councillors formally announced the adoption of Hon. Emeka Joseph Orji for a second term, citing his outstanding leadership, competence, and track record of service delivery.
The councillors and other stakeholders clarified that there is no established zoning arrangement or political formula governing the office of the Mayor or any other political position within Onitsha South Local Government Area. Consequently, the emergence of the incumbent Mayor followed a transparent, competitive, and merit-based nomination process.
They noted that Hon. Emeka Joseph Orji was duly nominated by party stakeholders and accredited delegates, alongside other qualified aspirants including the current Deputy Mayor purely on the basis of merit, capacity, and popular support, rather than zoning, sectional interests, or political sentiment.
According to the communiqué, the endorsement of the Mayor for a second term is neither sectional nor exclusionary, but rather a reflection of the collective will of the people.
“For the avoidance of doubt, individuals from all parts of Onitsha South Local Government Area, including all urban council areas, freely and actively participated in the nomination process under fair, open, and transparent conditions,” the councillors stated.

The Congress further explained that it had objectively reviewed the performance of the current administration over the past years and found Hon. Emeka Joseph Orji eminently qualified and deserving of a second term.
The assessment revealed notable and measurable achievements, particularly in the areas of:
Infrastructure development,
Urban regeneration and renewal,
Environmental sanitation,
Enhancement of security,
Recovery and protection of public and council properties,
Preservation of open spaces,
Firm enforcement of law, order, and civic responsibility
The councillors emphasized that these achievements have positively impacted governance, service delivery, and public order across the local government area.
In view of these accomplishments, the Congress unanimously affirmed its unalloyed and unequivocal support for the continuity of the present administration for at least the next two years, in the overriding interest of stability, sustained development, and good governance in Onitsha South Local Government Area.
They further commended the strength of character, resolve, and political will demonstrated by the current administration, particularly in matters of law enforcement and maintenance of public order, describing it as exceptional and second to none.
The Congress warned that any proposed departure from, or abrupt change to, the current administration—as being advocated by a few individuals—would be counterproductive and capable of undermining the stability and progress recorded so far.
Such actions, they noted, would neither serve the best interests of Onitsha South Local Government Area nor those of its peace-loving and law-abiding residents.
The councillors and stakeholders also expressed their deep appreciation to the Executive Governor of Anambra State, Prof. Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, for his numerous laudable projects within and around Onitsha South Local Government Area, as well as for his consistent support to the Council.
They acknowledged and commended the Governor’s unwavering commitment to grassroots development and respectfully called for continued collaboration and partnership between the state government and the local government for the overall benefit of the people.

IPOB Lawyer Ejiofor Demands Release of Igbo Youths Held at Wawa Barracks

Titus Eleweke

Renowned Nigerian human rights lawyer and lead counsel to the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has called on the Federal Government of Nigeria and the Attorney-General of the Federation to urgently intervene and order the immediate release of hundreds of Igbo youths being unlawfully detained at the Wawa Barracks.


Ejiofor made the call in a statement issued on Wednesday titled “Midweek Musing: When Justice Looks North and Blinks South — The Irony of Selective Prosecution and the Silent Suffering of a People.”

He lamented that the detained youths have spent an unreasonably long time in custody without trial,describing their continued detention as a grave violation of their constitutional rights.

According to the human rights lawyer, there appears to be a disturbing disparity in the application of justice between Nigeria’s regions, particularly between the South-East and the North.
He alleged that individuals from the North who were implicated in acts of banditry and terrorism during the tenure of former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, were never prosecuted, while Igbo youths are routinely arrested, blindfolded, and consigned to prolonged detention.

Ejiofor stated that Nigeria has tested the patience of the Igbo people for far too long and that the continued detention of these youths lacks any legal or moral justification.
He further referenced recent revelations from the Department of State Services (DSS) that emerged during the ongoing prosecution of the former Attorney-General, noting that these disclosures have shocked many Nigerians. According to him, during Malami’s tenure, the former Attorney-General allegedly failed, refused, or neglected to prosecute individuals predominantly of northern extraction whose names had been publicly listed years earlier by security agencies as alleged financiers of terrorism.
“These were not mere rumours or street gossip,” “They were conclusions reportedly reached through extensive intelligence investigations.” Ejiofor stated.

He noted that the irony of the situation is impossible to ignore.
He explained that those individuals were accused of funding some of the most violent non-state actors destabilising Nigeria, including Boko Haram, ISWAP, armed bandit groups, and allied jihadist networks.

Despite claims that their activities were supported by credible and verifiable intelligence, Ejiofor said prosecutions were mysteriously abandoned, investigative files were closed, and some of the suspects were quietly cleared.
“One is compelled to ask,” he queried, “was terrorism suddenly eradicated, or was it simply forgiven?”

A Different Standard in the South-East
Ejiofor contrasted this situation with developments in the South-East, where, he said, young people are routinely arrested and detained for extended periods based on mere suspicion, association, or profiling. While acknowledging the importance of allowing judicial processes to run their full course and avoiding premature conclusions, he maintained that the nature and content of the charges disclosed so far raise deeply troubling questions about fairness, equity, and the impartial application of justice in Nigeria.
He urged the Federal Government to act decisively, restore public confidence in the justice system, and end what he described as the selective prosecution and systemic injustice suffered by the Igbo people—beginning with the immediate release of all unlawfully detained youths at the Wawa Barracks.



Read the full statement:


MIDWEEK MUSING

WHEN JUSTICE LOOKS NORTH AND BLINKS SOUTH

The Irony of Selective Prosecution and the Silent Suffering of a People

There are moments in a nation’s history when the law, instead of standing tall as the blind guardian of justice, appears to tilt, ever so subtly towards convenience, geography, or ethnicity. Nigeria, regrettably, seems to be living through one such moment.

Recent revelations emanating from the Department of State Services (DSS), in the course of the ongoing prosecution of a former Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, have startled many Nigerians. While it is both prudent and responsible to refrain from drawing premature conclusions, given that judicial processes are still unfolding, the content of the charges so far disclosed, raises deeply troubling questions. Questions not merely of legality, but of conscience, consistency, and credibility.

Terror Financiers Known; Yet Untouched
One limb of the allegations reportedly suggests that, during his tenure, the former Attorney-General failed, refused, or neglected to prosecute individuals whose names, obviously, predominantly of northern extraction, had been published years earlier by security agencies as financiers of terrorism. These were not whispers from street corners, but conclusions reportedly drawn from extensive intelligence investigations. The irony is difficult to ignore.
These individuals were alleged to have funded some of the most vicious non-state actors tormenting the Nigerian state: Boko Haram, ISWAP, armed bandit groups, and allied jihadist networks. Their alleged activities were said to be backed by verifiable intelligence. Yet, prosecutions were abandoned, files closed, and clean bills of health quietly issued. One might ask: was terrorism suddenly cured, or merely forgiven?

A Different Standard in the South-East
Now, let us juxtapose this with what transpired in the South-East.


Speaking not from hearsay but from direct professional experience, I can state, without fear of contradiction, that my law office personally defended hundreds of Igbo youths, fathers, mothers, and breadwinners who were arbitrarily arrested across the South-East. Some were seized on their way to burials, others at their workplaces, and a few; only the “fortunate” ones, were eventually brought before the courts.

They were charged with offences grandly labelled as terrorism, membership of terrorist organisations, illegal possession of firearms, and other elaborately framed but manifestly unfounded allegations. Some of these charges were instituted before the Federal High Court in Abuja, at the instance and upon the advice of the very office of the former Attorney-General of the Federation, now under scrutiny.

After full trials, every one of those cases collapsed. The accused persons were discharged and acquitted. No evidence. No links. No crimes known to law.

Yet the damage had been done.

Some of the accused died in custody. Others spent months and years incarcerated, their lives and livelihoods destroyed; only to be told, belatedly, that they had committed no offence at all.

Meanwhile, the alleged real sponsors of terror, those whose activities shook the nation, remained free, visible, and curiously untouched.

Wawa Barracks: Detention Without End
Even more disturbing is the fate of hundreds of Igbo youths who have now spent four to six years in detention at the notorious Wawa Barracks, Niger State.

Their “offence”?

Some of them travelled to Abuja in 2021 to observe court proceedings relating to the trial of Nnamdi Kanu. They were not arrested at the court premises. Their vehicle was trailed to Lokoja, where they were apprehended while returning home to the East.

To this day, they remain in detention, without trial, without conviction, without justification known to law.

In a country governed by a Constitution, one struggles to understand how solidarity became a crime, or how spectatorship in a courtroom mutated into terrorism.

Justice Must Not Wear Regional Glasses
It bears repeating: this commentary is not an attempt to prejudge ongoing proceedings. Rather, it is a call to national memory in a country that too often forgets yesterday’s truths by tomorrow morning.

Selective justice is not justice.
Delayed justice is not justice.
Ethnic justice is a contradiction in terms.

A system that prosecutes the weak with enthusiasm while shielding the powerful with silence does not fight terrorism; it rebrands it.

A Final Appeal

I therefore, respectfully but firmly call on the Federal Government of Nigeria and the Attorney-General of the Federation to urgently intervene and order the immediate release of the hundreds of Igbo youths still languishing in unlawful detention at Wawa Barracks.

They have waited long enough.
Nigeria has tested their patience long enough.
The law has no justification left

BREAKING:Sit-at-Home Storm: Emma Powerful Steps Down as IPOB Spokesperson


Titus Eleweke

Comrade Emma Powerful, the Spokesperson, Media, and Publicity Secretary of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has formally resigned from his position.
His resignation followed the controversial sit-at-home order issued for Monday, February 2, 2026, which the leadership of IPOB reportedly considered detrimental to the development of the South-East region.
As a result of the directive, the IPOB leadership barred him from further speaking on behalf of the organization.
In his resignation letter, released on Saturday night, Emma Powerful stated that after deep reflection, consultation with his conscience, and careful consideration of recent developments within the movement, he had decided to step down from his role, effective Friday, January 31, 2026.
He said that the decision was not taken lightly.
“I have served with commitment, discipline, and loyalty, believing strongly in the ideals of justice, equity, and truth that originally inspired my involvement,” “However, the unfolding realities, internal contradictions, and emerging approaches being adopted in recent times have made it increasingly difficult for me to continue in this capacity in good conscience.”he said.
He further noted that continuing in silence or acting as though everything was normal would amount to a betrayal of his principles.

“It has become clear to me that remaining silent or proceeding as though all is well would constitute self-betrayal and a departure from the values I stand for. I believe that every individual must know when to step aside rather than compromise deeply held convictions,” he stated.
Emma Powerful announced that January 31, 2026, marked his final day of issuing any statements or press releases in any capacity connected to IPOB, warning that any publication or communication bearing his name after that date should not be attributed to him.
He expressed gratitude to those who supported his work and stood by him throughout his tenure.
“I remain grateful to all who believed in my work, supported my efforts, and stood for truth at various times. I wish everyone well as they navigate the path ahead. History will judge us all,” he added.