@Baggio2345 Wjzvvx can I 0'!& Ending a new shares and they I can easily UI with a I have been in tier 3 Ekunsunmi tttrt I have been invited to the outgoing email ✉️📨📨📨 I have been trying to find a new phone 📱🤳🤳 is a bit
I have immense respect for Sheik Jingir but I am constrained to point out that the extremist rhetoric he has indulged in here is most unhelpful and neither is it true.
Worse of all is the fact that it is highly provocative.
Kindly take note that it is a very slippery and dangerous slope to take and is best avoided.
Nigeria is NOT a Muslim country and neither is she a Christian country.
She is a SECULAR and MULTI-RELIGIOUS state comprising of BOTH Christians and Muslims in equal numbers and that is our strength.
We are supporting a Muslim/Muslim ticket for 2027, as we did in 2023, only because of the calibre, ability, sincerity of purpose, character, utility and electoral strength of our Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates and their ability to deliver and not because they are Muslims.
One day we may have a Christian/Christian ticket too because with God all things are possible.
Let us leave religion out of politics and consider issues, policies and personalities instead.
The Christian community has fared very well in Nigeria in the last three years under this Government and far better than they did between 2015 and 2023 even though at that time we had a Muslim/Christian ticket.
We must not allow this issue to divide our ranks.
We are NIGERIANS before being Christian or Muslim and we must not only stand as ONE but also go to the polls as ONE.
We overcame religious intolerance in 2023 and won the presidential election and by God's grace we will do the same again in 2027.
(FFK)
I never see this kind thing before.
You dey beg still dey cvrse the person😂
But infusing Igbo inside english dey sweet sha
And I Love the Imo dialect 😍
Nnamdi Kanu writes from Sokoto prison, sacks personal lawyer Ifeanyi Ejiofor
By Francis Ugwu (Daily Post)
The jailed leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, has formally terminated the services of his longtime personal lawyer, Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor, and directed him to stop representing him, his family, or IPOB in any capacity.
In a letter dated July 22, 2026, and written from the Sokoto Correctional Centre, Kanu said Ejiofor’s engagement as his personal legal representative had earlier been terminated verbally, adding that the latest correspondence served as formal written confirmation of that decision.
Kanu also withdrew what he described as any authority previously granted to Ejiofor to act for or represent IPOB, insisting that the lawyer no longer had any express, implied or ostensible authority to speak or act on behalf of the separatist group.
Citing Section II, Subsection A of the IPOB Code of Conduct, Kanu said the power to appoint, suspend or dismiss principal officers rests exclusively with the IPOB leader unless expressly delegated.
According to him, no individual, committee or former office holder acting outside the provisions of the IPOB Code of Conduct can validly appoint or retain legal representatives for the organisation.
He therefore maintained that any purported mandate or authority claimed by Ejiofor to represent IPOB was no longer recognised.
Kanu directed the lawyer to immediately cease making public statements, granting interviews, issuing press releases or publishing social media posts on behalf of him, his family or IPOB.
He also instructed Ejiofor to stop presenting himself as his legal representative or that of IPOB in any court, forum or public space and to take the necessary legal steps to withdraw from any pending matters where he remained counsel on record.
“Accordingly, I hereby place you on formal notice that you are not authorized to disclose, publish, communicate, exploit, or otherwise use any confidential or privileged information acquired in the course of your retainer, whether directly or indirectly, for any purpose whatsoever, except as required by law or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction, without my express written authorization from me.
“Any unauthorized disclosure or misuse of privileged information may constitute professional misconduct and may give rise to disciplinary proceedings before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, as well as any other remedies available under the law,” parts of the statement read.
Kanu cautioned that any breach of client confidentiality or unauthorized disclosure of privileged information could amount to professional misconduct and attract disciplinary proceedings before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, LPDC, in addition to other legal actions.
The efforts to entice reluctant Igbo youths to join the Army should be passed around to agencies like FIRS, CBN, Customs, NNPC which hardly recruit Igbos since the end of the war in 1970, to the point that a government was violently overthrown in 1975 for appointing an Igbo as NNPC GM. Igbos have institutional memory of the official redlines drawn against them in Nigeria.
Time to de-proscribe IPOB and end a discriminatory terror tag that targets Igbos
The proscription of IPOB as a terrorist group in 2017 was never about genuine national security. It was (and remains) a politically motivated tool to suppress legitimate political dissent by the Igbo people and criminalize an entire ethnic group’s political expression.
International bodies, Nigerian courts, and even the US & UK have repeatedly flagged the terror tag on IPOB as disproportionate, unlawful, and discriminatory.
On 1st October 2020, multiple UN Special Rapporteurs sent an official communication to the Nigerian government urging it to “reconsider the proscription of IPOB as a terrorist group” and explicitly warned that “proscription should not be used as a means to quell legitimate political opinion and expression, nor to prevent individuals from exercising their rights of peaceful assembly and of association.” The rapporteurs stated further that: “We are concerned that these growing restrictions… may [reflect] a growing climate of intolerance towards the Igbo and Christian minorities...”. This was not abstract criticism. It built on earlier findings by former Special Rapporteur Agnes Callamard (end-of-visit statement, 2nd September 2019).
In Opinion No. 25/2022 (published July 2022), the UN Human Rights Council examined the case of IPOB leader Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. It declared his detention arbitrary, citing his rendition as tied directly to his leadership of IPOB. The UN Council demanded his unconditional release and compensation, underscoring that criminalizing membership in IPOB violates international standards on freedom of association and expression.
On 8th March 2018, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) issued provisional measures in Communication 680/17 (Nnamdi Kanu & IPOB v. Federal Republic of Nigeria). It explicitly called on Nigeria to “rescind its decision branding IPOB and its members as terrorists” and “not to take any further action so as to avoid irreparable damage to the Victim, IPOB and its members.”
On 26th October 2023, in Suit No. E/20/2023 before Justice A.O. Onovo of the Enugu State High Court, the court declared the 2017 proscription of IPOB “illegal, unconstitutional, null and void.” It awarded N8 billion in damages to Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and ordered a public apology. Crucially, the court ruled that the proscription and its enforcement violate Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of ethnicity. This judgment stands as binding authority exposing the proscription’s true intent: collective punishment of Igbos for daring to seek a referendum.
Additionally, neither the United States nor the United Kingdom has ever designated IPOB a terrorist organization. Nigeria lobbied both governments to do so internationally and both refused.
• The UK applies a “rigorous, evidence-based approach” and concluded IPOB “does not meet the legal criteria to be banned under UK law.”
• The US has similarly declined, with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) warning in a 10 February 2022 analysis that designating IPOB would be a “mistake that risks causing a massive human rights crisis.”
From the foregoing, the evidence is irrefutable and compelling. The terror tag on IPOB is not a genuine security policy. it is instead a thinly-veiled ethnic discrimination aimed at Igbos, and it has enabled extrajudicial killings, mass arrests, and a climate of fear, while legitimate political agitation is crushed.
De-proscription is not clemency; it is justice. It restores constitutional equality, complies with binding international opinions, and ends the weaponization of anti-terror laws against one ethnic group. Nigeria’s government must act now to repeal the proscription, release those held solely for IPOB affiliation, and engage in genuine dialogue.
Aloy Ejimakor, 20th April 2026.