Dr. Emeka Kalu, the President of ECK Foundation, has appealed to the Federal Government to ensure unconditional release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) from detention.
Kalu in a statement on Tuesday, regretted that despite the indefinite detention of Kanu since 2021, the Federal Government was yet to prove the allegations of terrorism against him.
He insisted that Kanu’s prolonged detention made him a prisoner of conscience, given that the right to self-determination was a fundamental principle enshrined in both the Nigerian constitution and various international treaties that Nigeria had ratified.
He queried the government for holding Kanu for so long without allowing him to face his accusers or the charges filed against him to be proven in a court of law.
He declared that the delay tactics that had been adopted by previous administration and maintained by the present administration was a show of insincerity, maintaining that similar agitators in Nigeria were walking free on the streets because they were not Igbos.
He insisted that the situation not only undermined Kanu’s rights, but also cast a shadow over Nigeria’s commitment to democratic principles and human rights.
The ECK Foundation President did not mince words in accusing Southeast leaders of conspiracy of silence on Kanu’s crisis.
He accused the Southeast leaders of using Kanu’s incarceration as a bargaining chip for future political gains, particularly in relation to the 2027 elections.
He expressed that this approach not only neglected Kanu’s plight, but also failed to address the underlying issues of marginalisation that Kanu had been vocal about.
He added: “Kanu’s detention is not just an individual issue, but a collective concern for the Igbo community. Mazi is our brother who has stood up against the marginalisation of Ndi Igbo, for which he is suffering alone today.
“The detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has significant implications for the Igbo community and the broader human rights landscape in Nigeria. His case has sparked intense debates about self-determination, marginalisation, and the limits of free speech.”