By Anyi Kings
Published On the Biafra Post
The recent viral poster of Maxwell Opara—one of Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyers—suggesting his alignment with the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) ahead of a 2027 bid for the Federal House of Representatives sparked widespread reactions across social media.
Despite the controversy it generated, I deliberately withheld my comment. I wanted facts, not rumours. I wanted clarity before analysis.
Today, during a radio interview, Barrister Maxwell Opara officially declared his intention to contest in 2027 under the NDC platform. More strikingly, he openly stated that he has the blessing of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and further urged Ndigbo to begin joining political parties, claiming Kanu now realizes that elected voices within Nigeria’s political structure may be strategically necessary.
Let me state this clearly:
I do not condemn Mazi Nnamdi Kanu for this apparent shift in political strategy.
Neither do I condemn Barrister Maxwell Opara for exercising his constitutional right to political participation.
As an advocate of freedom of association, every individual has the right to choose their political path.
Interestingly, earlier this year, the Indigenous People of Biafra Directorate of State (DOS) issued a political directive encouraging Biafrans to prepare for 2027 by supporting courageous politicians willing to sponsor a referendum bill within Nigeria’s constitutional framework.
That, at least, suggested clarity of purpose.
But this is where the controversy begins.
For years, Nnamdi Kanu consistently portrayed Nigeria’s political system as hopelessly corrupt and fundamentally incapable of delivering freedom. He condemned participation in Nigerian politics as betrayal. Politicians across Biafraland were painted as compromised, corrupt, and unworthy of association.
He criticized Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu for returning from exile to participate in Nigerian politics.
He criticized Ralph Uwazuruike for engaging politically after his release.
Anyone within the struggle who dared suggest political engagement as a strategic pathway was quickly branded a saboteur, blackmailed, or politically lynched.
This anti-political doctrine has had consequences—some deadly.
One painful example remains the killings in Orlu during the 2023 election period, where innocent women reportedly gathered for a political meeting, only to be attacked and murdered by armed actors allegedly operating under separatist rhetoric.
At that time, while IPOB’s DOS and media outlets publicly condemned such atrocities, questions remained about the silence—or selective silence—of key legal and political allies around Kanu.
This raises difficult but necessary questions:
When politicians fund the movement behind closed doors, is that strategy?
When ordinary people engage politicians openly, is that sabotage?
When Kanu collaborates with politicians, it is called wisdom.
When others do the same, they are branded traitors.
So who, truly, is betraying the cause?
Between the mothers allegedly killed in Orlu for accepting political assistance…
…and leaders reportedly benefiting from political connections…
who is the real saboteur?
I leave that to history—and to your conscience.
As for Barrister Maxwell Opara, I do not condemn his ambition.
But let nobody mistake political ambition for ideological commitment.
If Maxwell Opara eventually finds his way into the Green Chamber, the question is simple:
Will he sponsor a referendum bill for Biafra?
Or will this simply become another chapter in the politics of personal survival and financial opportunity?
To date, many observers note that he has spoken passionately about his client’s legal rights—but rarely, if ever, publicly about referendum legislation as a legislative mission.
So naturally, people are asking:
Is this about liberation… or political calculation?
Anyi Kings.
May 15, 2026
Post A Comment:
0 comments: