The Quest For Biafran Sovereignty, Illegal Arrest Of The IPOB Leader, The Role International And Regional Bodies Should Play In Ensuring Jus...
The Quest For Biafran Sovereignty, Illegal Arrest Of The IPOB Leader, The Role International And Regional Bodies Should Play In Ensuring Justice and Self-Determination
EASTERN PILOT: May 8, 2025.
By Mazi OON
The push for Biafran sovereignty has gained significant momentum in recent years, and this is largely thanks to the efforts of the Indigenous People of Biafra(IPOB), under the leadership of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. But also, the high-handed manner with which the Nigeria State has been against the peaceful IPOB movement and her Leader immensely contributed to attracting wider sympathy for the Biafra course.
It is important to emphasize that this desire for an independent Biafra is not borne out of greed or selfishness, whatsoever. It is deeply rooted in historical grievances that trace back to years before the Nigerian genocidal war against Biafra between 1967 and 1970, during which period the Republic of Biafra briefly existed away from Nigeria. The war ended with the No Victor - No Vanquish false proclamation, followed by well-coordinated marginalization, political exclusion, and socio-economic neglect of the Biafran region. This, therefore, warranted the revivification of the calls for Biafra independence, as warned by General Philip Effiong( the second-in-command to General Ojukwu, the Biafran eternal leader).
The Illegal Arrest of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and his extraordinary rendition from Kenya to Nigeria in June 2021 sparked global outrage, drawing sharp criticism from well-meaning individuals, human rights advocates, and legal experts alike; highlighting the urgent need for international and regional organizations, such as the United Nations (UN) and the African Union(AU) to step in. Their involvement is crucial for ensuring justice, protection of human rights, and mediating disputes by international legal standards and the principles of self-determination.
As stated earlier, the revival of the Biafran movement is fundamentally tied to the perceived political and economic marginalization of the Igbo people in Nigeria since the 1960s. This and many other inconsistencies in the British-contracted country(Nigeria) are what triggered the IPOB’s activism, spearheaded by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. Obviously, the IPOB's consistent peaceful call for sovereign Biafra through a United Nations-supervised referendum has captured global attention through effective media outreaches, diplomatic approaches, legal initiatives, and mass mobilization efforts. IPOB asserts that its mission is peaceful and grounded in the right to self-determination—a right that is recognized under international laws.
While the Nigerian government has labeled IPOB a terrorist organization, supporters of the movement contend that their activities are non-violent and constitutionally valid. The intricate nature of this conflict raises significant legal and human rights issues, particularly concerning the treatment of IPOB members, the suppression of protests, and the limitations placed on free speech.
In June 2021, the leader of IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was taken into custody under questionable circumstances in Kenya and then sent back to Nigeria without any formal extradition process—something many experts label as an extraordinary rendition. This move drew sharp criticism from international legal observers, who raised serious concerns about the legality of such a transfer, particularly given the lack of due process and international legal cooperation.
Since then, Kanu has been held and faced charges that include treasonable felonies and terrorism. His extended detention, alongside claims of his human rights violations and the denial of bail, has sparked worries about the fairness of Nigeria’s legal system and what it means for political dissent in the country.
The right to self-determination is recognized in several international legal documents:
1. The United Nations Charter (1945) – Article 1(2) highlights the UN's mission to uphold equal rights and the self-determination of peoples.
2. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) – Article 1 asserts that all peoples have the right to self-determination.
3. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (1981) – Article 20 confirms the undeniable and inalienable right of all peoples to self-determination. However, applying this right can be quite complicated and context-dependent. While international law acknowledges self-determination, it also stresses the importance of respecting existing national borders—a principle known as uti possidetis juris. Finding a balance between these interests often requires careful mediation by global and regional institutions.
The Role of International and Regional Bodies
1. United Nations (UN):
Monitoring Human Rights: The UN Human Rights Council should look into allegations of human rights abuses, such as torture, suppression of free speech, and the denial of fair trial rights in Mazi Kanu’s situation.
Mediation and Conflict Resolution: The UN could help foster dialogue between IPOB and the Nigerian government, using examples from other separatist or autonomy-seeking movements like South Sudan, Kosovo, and East Timor.
Advisory Opinions and Resolutions: Through entities like the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN could provide non-binding legal opinions or facilitate third-party mediation to help clarify the legal aspects of self-determination claims.
2. African Union (AU):
Enforcing the African Charter: The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights should evaluate the legality of Kanu’s arrest and Nigeria’s adherence to regional human rights standards.
Conflict Prevention: The AU’s Peace and Security Council needs to take a more proactive stance in addressing internal conflicts before they escalate into larger regional crises.
Normative Engagement: The AU must find a balance between its commitment to non-interference and its responsibility to uphold human rights and promote democratic governance among its member states.
Challenges and Considerations
State Sovereignty vs. Peoples’ Rights: Striking a balance between respecting national borders and addressing the legitimate concerns of marginalized communities is a complex issue.
Violence and Militarization: The Nigerian government’s aggressive tactics and the growing militarization in the South-East threaten the possibility of a peaceful resolution.
International Double Standards: The global community often reacts inconsistently to separatist movements, influenced by varying geopolitical interests.
Conclusion and Recommendations
The Biafra agitation, represented by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s fight, goes beyond just being a local issue in Nigeria—it highlights larger concerns about governance, human rights, and international justice. His illegal arrest and ongoing detention, especially with the serious allegations of human rights violations, call for immediate and unbiased scrutiny.
Both international and regional organizations have a responsibility to uphold justice and legality by:
Ensuring transparency and due process in Kanu’s trial.
Promoting inclusive discussions between Nigerian authorities and the IPOB.
Acknowledging and supporting the legal frameworks that protect self-determination and minority rights.
While the principle of sovereignty is highly valued in the international community, it should not be a shield to stifle genuine demands for justice and self-determination. The UN and AU should not only react to conflicts but also work proactively to prevent them through fair, rights-based engagements.
Published by BiafraFirstSon
No comments