The embattled leader of IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has fingered government officials in South East states as beneficiaries of insecurity in the region The detained leader of the secessionist group bragged that insecurity in the region would end two minutes after his release Kanu has been in DSS detention since his extradition in June 2021 and is currently facing treasonable felony charges filed by the federal government
The embattled leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has disclosed that some government officials are benefiting from the numerous insecurity challenges in the Southeast region of Nigeria.
Kanu made the revelation while speaking to journalists after Justice Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja ruled out his bail application on Tuesday, March 19.
In a video tweeted by Channels Television after the court hearing, the IPOB leader assured peace would return to the region immediately after his release from the Department of State Services (DSS) custody.
What Nnamdi Kanu says after court judgment
“I suspect that some people in government are complicit. They are making money with this insecurity. They know if Nnamdi Kanu is outside, this nonsense will stop in two minutes.” “Anybody involved in any form of violence in the South-East in the name of IPOB, let me come out of this nonsense, this mess, only two minutes, I guarantee you, and there will be peace in the South-East.”
Recall that Kanu has been in DSS custody since his extradition from Kenya in June 2021, and he is currently facing charges of treasonable felony. He told the court that he was not being treated well by the secret police and alleged that there was a conspiracy for him to die in the DSS custody
Court dismisses Nnamfi Kanu’s appeal. It was earlier reported that the Court of Appeal in Abuja dismissed Nnamdi Kanu’s appeal against the federal high court judgment that affirmed his arrest. The appeal, which was filed against the police and the DSS, was dismissed by Justice Okon Abang of the appellate court.
Justice Abang held that the appellants failed to establish their claim on miscarriage of justice and dismissed the appeal for lack of merit.
by Bada Yusuf
