By Anyi Kings | The Biafra Post | October 12, 2026
The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) Homeland Leadership, under the Directorate of States reportedly headed by Mazi Chikadibia Edoziem, has issued an official disclaimer distancing the organisation from a circulating voice note threatening the resumption of Monday sit-at-home activities in Biafraland unless Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is released.
In a memorandum dated October 11, 2026, and signed by Mazi Expensive, identified in the document as IPOB Homeland Publicity Secretary, the leadership declared that the organisation neither authorised nor endorsed the message being circulated through WhatsApp groups, private chats and online communities.
The statement also called on the Nigerian Police Force to exercise caution when attributing the alleged threat to IPOB or the Eastern Security Network (ESN), insisting that allegations must be supported by credible evidence rather than unverified reports.
IPOB Leadership Rejects Association With the Voice Note
According to the memorandum, the circulating audio message threatens to revive Monday sit-at-home activities in Biafraland if Kanu remains in detention.
The leadership described the message as unauthorised and stated that no individual should presume to speak for the organisation without verifiable authorisation from its recognised leadership.
The document further recalled that IPOB called off the Monday sit-at-home directive in 2021 and subsequently issued statements reaffirming that position.
On that basis, the leadership argued that presenting the latest voice note as an official IPOB directive would be misleading.
Police Urged to Establish Facts Before Naming IPOB
The disclaimer comes in response to a Nigerian Police Force publication dated October 9, 2026, which, according to the document, associates the alleged threat with IPOB and the Eastern Security Network.
The leadership argued that a police publication should not automatically be treated as conclusive proof of an organisation's involvement in an alleged threat.
It urged the police to investigate the origin, authorship, credibility and intent of the circulating message before making definitive public attributions.
The statement maintained that allegations should not be presented as established facts before investigations are completed.
It also called on the police to refrain from implicating IPOB if credible evidence establishing the organisation's involvement is unavailable.
Leadership Warns Against Unauthorised Statements
The memorandum reiterated that IPOB would not accept responsibility for statements, threats or directives it had neither issued nor authorised.
It further urged members of the public to verify information before sharing it, particularly when such information concerns sensitive political and security issues in the South-East.
The statement also questioned why individuals allegedly making threats in Kanu's name should not be required to clarify their relationship with the message if they are unable to disassociate themselves from it.
However, the document did not provide independent evidence establishing who produced the voice note or identifying the individuals responsible for circulating it.
A Call for Responsible Public Communication
The controversy highlights the importance of verifying audio recordings and online messages before attributing them to political organisations, particularly in an atmosphere where security concerns and competing political narratives can influence public perception.
For IPOB, the central message of the disclaimer is that the organisation should not be held responsible for statements it says it did not authorise.
For the police, the challenge is to establish the facts surrounding the alleged threat and communicate the findings responsibly.
For the public, the leadership's appeal is straightforward: verify information before sharing it and avoid treating allegations as established facts without supporting evidence.
Conclusion
The October 11 memorandum represents a formal attempt by the IPOB Homeland Leadership identified in the document to distance the organisation from the circulating voice note and challenge what it considers premature attribution of responsibility.
Whether the police investigation will establish the source of the message, the identity of its author and any connection to IPOB remains a matter requiring verifiable evidence.
Post A Comment:
0 comments: