In our capacity as Council of Elders of the Movement of Biafrans in Nigeria (MOBIN) previously known as Council of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra conducting the affairs of the remnants of Biafra called Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), and running the Customary Government by which we commenced the struggle for self-determination by legal methodology and political diplomacy before Mr Nnamdi Kanu came from MASSOB and hijacked the Movement through the use of Media power, now speaking on behalf of both the living and the dead among us, have considered all the issues and challenges facing our struggle for self-determination, and in consequence whereof we make this statement and give our consent for its publication by all media houses in the whole world:
1. IN THE BEGINNING:
Barr Emeka Emekesiri, founder and vision bearer of IPOB, filing the case between Biafra and Nigeria in Suit No FHC/OW/CS/102/2012. Standing by his side was Engr Innocent Amadi.
Emeka Emekesiri, explaining legal issues to the Council of Elders of IPOB after a Court session.
(1) In the beginning, our struggle for self-determination was glorious and respected by all authorities in Nigeria and in the International Community. Unfortunately, a man called Mr Nnamdi Kanu, who left Chief Ralph Uwazuruike’s MASSOB and joined us with a laptop broadcasting on an internet radio called Radio Biafra destroyed our struggle by the use of false propaganda and incendiary broadcasts and incitement to violence. He rebelled from the authority of the Customary Government and the Supreme Council of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra.
(2) We excommunicated Nnamdi Kanu on 12 May 2014, and he formed his own faction of IPOB which went into confrontations with the Nigerian Authorities. He was arrested and detained at Kuje Correctional Centre Abuja. He stood trial for the offence of treasonable felony and was granted bail with some conditions. He violated the Bail Conditions and set up his private army that paraded in his compound and gave him salute as the Commander in Chief of Biafra. He inspected the Guard of Honour in Parades and took salutes just like the President and Commander in Chief of a sovereign nation. In one of the parades, he announced that he would go to Abuja and cut off the head of Buhari and bring it to Umuahia. There was great jubilation among his multitude of followers.
(3) Nnamdi Kanu converted to Judaism. He told the Court that he was a Jew and not a Christian. Therefore, a Jewish Rabbi was required as one of his sureties for his Bail. He was so highly respected and worshipped by his followers that they believed he was a prophet and composed some songs singing “Holy, Holy, Holy, Nnamdi Kanu is another Saviour”. He was worshipped by his followers like a god as shown by the photographs published on the internet by his followers.
Nnamdi Kanu appearing like a Jewish Prophet
Nnamdi Kanu being worshipped like a god by his followers, singing “holy, holy, holy, Nnamdi Kanu is another saviour”. Is this the abomination that maketh desolate as prophesied by Daniel?
(4) The Nigerian Army could not tolerate a private person setting up an army and taking salutes in Parades. On 14 September 2017, the Nigerian Armed Forces came to kill Nnamdi Kanu in a military operation tagged “Operation Python Dance” and invaded his house but he escaped and fled Nigeria. When his matter was called up in Court, his lawyers said they did not know his whereabouts. His Bail was cancelled and a Bench Warrant was issued against him, thereby making him liable to be arrested anywhere in the world and to be brought back to the Court as a fugitive to continue his trial.
(5) After some years he was seen in Israel and later in London. He started broadcasting what were considered as terrorism messages from the overseas ordering the people of the South-East of Nigeria to sit at home every Monday and shut down the whole territory, threatening that anybody who disobeyed his Order would die. His Sit-At-Home order was enforced by Unknown Gun Men who killed anybody that disobeyed the Order. The South-East was deserted every Monday, and the businesses were closed thereby forcing the people to flee to other places in the West and North and outside the country to make a living. He created an armed group called Eastern Security Network (ESN) to protect the Eastern Region. He was arrested in Kenya and brought to Nigeria in 2021 and tried for terrorism acts.
(6) His trial lasted for many years. On 20 November 2025, Nnamdi Kanu was convicted of terrorism charges and sentenced to Life Imprisonment. We have heard that he has instructed his lawyers to file an appeal against his conviction. Considering that he has a right of appeal which is not yet exhausted, his case is deemed to be pending in Court. Therefore, we shall refrain from commenting on his case to avoid violating the Rule of Sub-Judice. He built a strong cult-like followership of radical youths who would be willing to kill any person that speaks against him.
(7) There is a silent majority that hate Nnamdi Kanu’s method of agitation for self-determination. They accused him of being responsible for the destruction of the South-East Region of Nigeria. But for the reasons of fear of his radical and fanatical followers, the silent majority are afraid to speak openly against his excesses, lest they be killed.
(8) Surprisingly, the multitude of Nnamdi Kanu’s followers did not organize massive protests to shut down the whole Nigeria for the release of their leader following his sentencing and Life Imprisonment in Sokoto Prison. It is our opinion that their failure to protest and secure the release of their leader shows that his followers are in the minority but used media propaganda to dominate the airwaves and narratives of the struggle. The silent majority have continued to keep silent and watch silently.
(9) However, some people did worse than Nnamdi Kanu to set our Movement backward. We have decided to forget the past and move forward with the original vision of self-determination by the rule of law, politics, and diplomacy. What we have said and written here constitutes part of the History of the Biafran Struggle. In this world, some people make history whether positive or negative history while others read the history. Our history must not be hidden.
2. MOVING FORWARD:
(1) There is a problem now with the struggle for self-determination for the remnants of the Biafrans who the founder and vision bearer of IPOB described as Indigenous People of Biafra. The image of the Biafran Struggle has been terribly damaged because of the violence, frauds, lies and deceits in the name of BIAFRA.
(2) The judgement and sentencing of Nnamdi Kanu and the declaration of IPOB as a terrorist organization under the Nigerian law have affected our struggle for self-determination. The question is not whether Nnamdi Kanu and IPOB were wrongly or rightly declared as terrorists, the truth is that the Judgment and Order declaring Nnamdi Kanu and IPOB as terrorists have not been set aside on appeal. We may not agree with the judgment and Order, but they remain valid under the Nigeria Law until set aside and overturned on appeal.
(3) The imposition of a sit-at-home order in the South-East of Nigeria and its enforcement by the unknown gun men killing anybody who disobeyed the order destroyed the peace and economy of the whole region and made many people to run away from the South-East and settle in the North and West and South-South. The violence and confrontations have led to the death of many Biafran youths. It was also reported that some Biafran militant groups killed many Nigerian police men and military officers and destroyed Government properties. Up to this day, the effect of the sit-at-home order remains as some businesses are still locked up on Mondays for fear of the Unknown Gun Men.
(4) Some of his supporters have argued that Nnamdi Kanu had a good intention, but his faction of IPOB was hijacked by criminals who started committing the offence of kidnapping, car theft, armed robbery, cannibalism, etc, in the name of IPOB and ESN. They may be correct, but the law holds the leader of an organization liable and responsible for any wrong done in the name of the organization. This is called vicarious liability in law.
(5) As a result of these killings and violent confrontations resulting in insecurity of lives and properties in the South-East, the name of Biafra has become odious and abhorrent in the ears of many people including Biafrans and Nigerians. Some Biafran activists have withdrawn from the Struggle because of the frauds and deception associated with the Biafran Struggle. In fact, the Nigerian Authorities now wrongly regard it as a treasonable felony to mention the name of Biafra.
(6) It is necessary to set out the law clearly. Mentioning the name of BIAFRA is not an offence in law. Our first task now is to restore the image of the struggle for self-determination. We have reviewed the whole situation. It is not controvertible that the right to self-determination is a human right guaranteed by the Nigerian Law and international law. But the question is whether we should continue to agitate for Biafra or for the Igbo Nation.
(7) Some people are of the opinion that the name of BIAFRA should be forgotten because it has achieved its purpose having been declared in 1967 to save the people from annihilation in the pogrom leading to the war between Biafra and Nigeria. They argue that what Nigeria needs is GOOD GOVERNANCE and that we should abandon the struggle for self-determination and pursue the struggle for Good Governance.
(8) They further argue that Nigerians are so fused together in marriages and business partnerships among the ethnic nationalities that any breakup would cause untold social problems. Therefore, they want the Nigerian polity to maintain the status quo and remain unchanged with Good Governance.
(9) Other people are of the opinion that the agitation for independence of a separate nation of Biafra is non-negotiable. They maintain their slogan as “Biafra or Death”.
(10) We have considered all the arguments and come out with the best solution that will satisfy the aspirations of all the people. We have changed our strategies considering the legal impediments on the use of the name of IPOB which the Federal Government of Nigeria proscribed as a terrorist organization. The question is not whether IPOB was wrongly or rightly proscribed as a terrorist organization but the fact that there is an Order of the Court for the proscription duly gazetted by the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Order remains valid until set aside on appeal.
(11) The Biafrans under our authority shall henceforth be described as Biafrans in Nigeria just like there are Arewa People in Nigeria with Arewa House in Kaduna and Oduduwa People in Nigeria with Oduduwa House in Lagos. Our Movement shall be known as Movement of Biafrans in Nigeria (MOBIN) which is the name by which we presented our Memorandum to the National Assembly for the Restructuring of Nigeria by devolution of power to the Regions so that every Region would govern itself and develop at its own pace within Nigeria.
(12) We have adopted the British Model of Politics and Administration. Instead of agitating for outright breakup of Nigeria, we are now agitating for the Restructuring of Nigeria by devolution of power to the Regions so that every Region would govern itself and develop at its own pace just as the United Kingdom of Great Britain has four nations in one country called Scotland, England, Ireland and Wales. We have noted that the people of Middle Belt have protested being included in the North as North Central. They want to be described as Middle Belt. Every Region can protect itself against insecurities and Islamic Jihadists. In effect, the present six geopolitical regions may be increased to eight or ten. For this reason, we have presented our Memorandum to the National Assembly for Restructuring of Nigeria by Devolution of Power to the Regions irrespective of the number of regions that may be created.
(7) Some people are of the opinion that the name of BIAFRA should be forgotten because it has achieved its purpose having been declared in 1967 to save the people from annihilation in the pogrom leading to the war between Biafra and Nigeria. They argue that what Nigeria needs is GOOD GOVERNANCE and that we should abandon the struggle for self-determination and pursue the struggle for Good Governance.
(8) They further argue that Nigerians are so fused together in marriages and business partnerships among the ethnic nationalities that any breakup would cause untold social problems. Therefore, they want the Nigerian polity to maintain the status quo and remain unchanged with Good Governance.
(9) Other people are of the opinion that the agitation for independence of a separate nation of Biafra is non-negotiable. They maintain their slogan as “Biafra or Death”.
(10) We have considered all the arguments and come out with the best solution that will satisfy the aspirations of all the people. We have changed our strategies considering the legal impediments on the use of the name of IPOB which the Federal Government of Nigeria proscribed as a terrorist organization. The question is not whether IPOB was wrongly or rightly proscribed as a terrorist organization but the fact that there is an Order of the Court for the proscription duly gazetted by the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Order remains valid until set aside on appeal.
(11) The Biafrans under our authority shall henceforth be described as Biafrans in Nigeria just like there are Arewa People in Nigeria with Arewa House in Kaduna and Oduduwa People in Nigeria with Oduduwa House in Lagos. Our Movement shall be known as Movement of Biafrans in Nigeria (MOBIN) which is the name by which we presented our Memorandum to the National Assembly for the Restructuring of Nigeria by devolution of power to the Regions so that every Region would govern itself and develop at its own pace within Nigeria.
(12) We have adopted the British Model of Politics and Administration. Instead of agitating for outright breakup of Nigeria, we are now agitating for the Restructuring of Nigeria by devolution of power to the Regions so that every Region would govern itself and develop at its own pace just as the United Kingdom of Great Britain has four nations in one country called Scotland, England, Ireland and Wales. We have noted that the people of Middle Belt have protested being included in the North as North Central. They want to be described as Middle Belt. Every Region can protect itself against insecurities and Islamic Jihadists. In effect, the present six geopolitical regions may be increased to eight or ten. For this reason, we have presented our Memorandum to the National Assembly for Restructuring of Nigeria by Devolution of Power to the Regions irrespective of the number of regions that may be created.
(2) Although our legal methodology is slow, it is the surest way to achieve self-determination. We have achieved the following things by our methodology:
- In 2013, we held a diplomatic meeting with the Government of Australia and sought for recognition by the Australian Government as required by International Law.
- In 2014, we were invited to participate in the 2nd ECOSSOC General Assembly Meeting of the African Union in Nairobi Kenya.
Barr Emeka Emekesiri in Nairobi Kenya standing with Dr Joseph Chilengi of Zambia, the Chairman of African Union ECOSSOC in 2014. The Chairman of AU is holding Barr Emekesiri’s book, “Biafra or Nigerian Presidency- What the Ibos Want”.
Barr Emeka Emekesiri interacting with leaders and delegates from other countries in the AU Meeting including the countries in North Africa, South Africa, Central Africa, and East Africa (Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Kenya, Ethiopia, etc) as he lobbies them for recognition of Biafra as a country in Africa.
- From 2013 to 2018, we wrote diplomatic letters and had series of meetings with the Governments of various countries in Europe, America, Asia, and Africa, as we sought their supports, friendship, and recognition. Then, in 2018, we had meetings with the British Government on the issue of the Biafran Independence and they requested our Position Statement in writing.
- Consequently, on 13 February 2018, we presented to the British Government our memorandum titled “PERMANENT SOLUTION TO THE NIGERIA-BIAFRA CONUNDRUM BASED ON THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT POLICY OF 1969” by the authority of the Customary Government of Indigenous People of Biafra in which we proffered the perfect solution to the political and social instability arising from the Nigeria-Biafra problem.
- On 4th May 2018, the Prime Minister of the Great Britain, The Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP, responded and accepted our Position Statement and stated as follows: “The UK welcomes the determination expressed in the Memorandum from the Indigenous People of Biafra to work to resolve any grievances peacefully. We continue to underline the importance of acting in accordance with the rule of law with all parties, including the Nigerian Government”. It is important to note that the “Indigenous People of Biafra” referred to by the British Government is the original IPOB which submitted the Memorandum by the authority of the Customary Government under the Supreme Council of Elders.
- On 8th December 2018, we established the Customary Government of Indigenous People of Biafra under the Nigerian Law by Deed Poll of Customary Governance duly stamped and registered in Nigeria as SDR/No 4720/ABSG pursuant to Section 315 of the Nigerian Constitution which recognised both Sharia Law and Customary Law as existing laws in force before the Nigerian Constitution.
- Using the Customary Law, we have been able to organise ourselves as a people living in Nigeria. We are aware that the Houses of Assembly in the North passed the Sharia Government Bill into Law to make it a State organ funded and run by the State. In our own case, the Houses of Assembly in the East did not pass our Customary Government Bill into Law.
- The difference is that Customary Governance created by Deed Poll comes under Private Law and Customary Law and not Statutory Law. Therefore, it is not a State organ and will not be given any allocation of funds by the State as of right unless by way of grants but if the State passes the Bill of Customary Governance into law, it becomes a State organ to be funded and run by the State just as the Sharia Government Bill was passed into law by the Houses of Assembly in the North and funded and run by the Governments of the Northern States.
- The most important aspect of our Position Statement accepted and supported by the British Government was to restructure Nigeria by devolution of power to the six geo-political regions so that every region would be autonomous and govern itself and grow at its own pace just like the four nations in Britain namely: Scotland, England, Ireland, and Wales. The British Government assured us that they would put pressure on the Nigerian Government to consider the restructuring of the country by devolution of power but said that it had to go through the National Assembly by due process.
- Initially, the Nigerian Government rejected our call for restructuring by devolution of power to the regions. However, through some diplomatic pressures on the Nigerian Government in 2021, the National Assembly decided to amend the Constitution, and placed Restructuring and Devolution of Power as Item No 2 on the list. The public hearing and presentation were in two days in all the 6 geopolitical zones of the country.
- Consequently, on 26 May 2021, during the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari, we presented our Memorandum to the Senate Committee of the National Assembly sitting at Enugu for amendment of the Nigerian Constitution. The Government of President Buhari failed to make the amendments. In 2025, the Administration of President Bola Tinubu also called for memorandum for amendment of the Nigerian Constitution. We presented the Memorandum on 4th and 5th July 2025.
- There are many sections of the Constitution that we required the National Assembly to amend. However, on the issue of restructuring and devolution of power, we presented the following amendment:
(1) That Section 2(1) of the Constitution be amended as follows:
“Nigeria is one indivisible and indissoluble Sovereign State to be known by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria without prejudice to the fundamental right of the people of any federating unit in the exercise of their right to self-determination by the rule of law through referendum”. By inserting the right to self-determination in the Nigerian Constitution through a referendum it emphasises the right to conduct referendum by the federating units in the exercise of their right to self-determination.
(2) That Section 2(2) of the Constitution be amended as follows:
“Nigeria shall be a Federation consisting of Regions and a Federal Capital Territory”.
(3) That Section 3(1) of the Constitution be amended as follows:
“There shall be six Regions in Nigeria (South East, South West, South-South, North East, North West and North Central) with thirty-six States as shown in the first column of Part 1 of the First Schedule to this Constitution without prejudice to the right of any region to create additional States within the Region or merge the existing States into one by a bill passed into law by the House of Parliament of the Region.”
(4) That an additional section be added as Section 3(7) as follows:
“Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 3(1) and 3(6) of this Constitution, the House of Parliament of every region shall have the power to organize the region and create such other political units as districts and councils or convert the existing states and local governments to districts and local councils in accordance with the need of the people”.
- In 2022, a member of the House of Representatives moved our Motion to divide Nigeria into six regions, but he was shouted down. The Speaker pretended not to hear the Motion. There was confusion in the House. Nevertheless, the struggle has started in the Parliament. The Motion shall be presented again in due course.
Currently, the political reality is that the existing six geopolitical regions are not enough as the people of Middle Belt want a separate Region.
- From 2013 to 2018, we wrote diplomatic letters and had series of meetings with the Governments of various countries in Europe, America, Asia, and Africa, as we sought their supports, friendship, and recognition. Then, in 2018, we had meetings with the British Government on the issue of the Biafran Independence and they requested our Position Statement in writing.
- Consequently, on 13 February 2018, we presented to the British Government our memorandum titled “PERMANENT SOLUTION TO THE NIGERIA-BIAFRA CONUNDRUM BASED ON THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT POLICY OF 1969” by the authority of the Customary Government of Indigenous People of Biafra in which we proffered the perfect solution to the political and social instability arising from the Nigeria-Biafra problem.
- On 4th May 2018, the Prime Minister of the Great Britain, The Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP, responded and accepted our Position Statement and stated as follows: “The UK welcomes the determination expressed in the Memorandum from the Indigenous People of Biafra to work to resolve any grievances peacefully. We continue to underline the importance of acting in accordance with the rule of law with all parties, including the Nigerian Government”. It is important to note that the “Indigenous People of Biafra” referred to by the British Government is the original IPOB which submitted the Memorandum by the authority of the Customary Government under the Supreme Council of Elders.
- On 8th December 2018, we established the Customary Government of Indigenous People of Biafra under the Nigerian Law by Deed Poll of Customary Governance duly stamped and registered in Nigeria as SDR/No 4720/ABSG pursuant to Section 315 of the Nigerian Constitution which recognised both Sharia Law and Customary Law as existing laws in force before the Nigerian Constitution.
- Using the Customary Law, we have been able to organise ourselves as a people living in Nigeria. We are aware that the Houses of Assembly in the North passed the Sharia Government Bill into Law to make it a State organ funded and run by the State. In our own case, the Houses of Assembly in the East did not pass our Customary Government Bill into Law.
- The difference is that Customary Governance created by Deed Poll comes under Private Law and Customary Law and not Statutory Law. Therefore, it is not a State organ and will not be given any allocation of funds by the State as of right unless by way of grants but if the State passes the Bill of Customary Governance into law, it becomes a State organ to be funded and run by the State just as the Sharia Government Bill was passed into law by the Houses of Assembly in the North and funded and run by the Governments of the Northern States.
- The most important aspect of our Position Statement accepted and supported by the British Government was to restructure Nigeria by devolution of power to the six geo-political regions so that every region would be autonomous and govern itself and grow at its own pace just like the four nations in Britain namely: Scotland, England, Ireland, and Wales. The British Government assured us that they would put pressure on the Nigerian Government to consider the restructuring of the country by devolution of power but said that it had to go through the National Assembly by due process.
- Initially, the Nigerian Government rejected our call for restructuring by devolution of power to the regions. However, through some diplomatic pressures on the Nigerian Government in 2021, the National Assembly decided to amend the Constitution, and placed Restructuring and Devolution of Power as Item No 2 on the list. The public hearing and presentation were in two days in all the 6 geopolitical zones of the country.
- Consequently, on 26 May 2021, during the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari, we presented our Memorandum to the Senate Committee of the National Assembly sitting at Enugu for amendment of the Nigerian Constitution. The Government of President Buhari failed to make the amendments. In 2025, the Administration of President Bola Tinubu also called for memorandum for amendment of the Nigerian Constitution. We presented the Memorandum on 4th and 5th July 2025.
- There are many sections of the Constitution that we required the National Assembly to amend. However, on the issue of restructuring and devolution of power, we presented the following amendment:
(1) That Section 2(1) of the Constitution be amended as follows:
“Nigeria is one indivisible and indissoluble Sovereign State to be known by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria without prejudice to the fundamental right of the people of any federating unit in the exercise of their right to self-determination by the rule of law through referendum”. By inserting the right to self-determination in the Nigerian Constitution through a referendum it emphasises the right to conduct referendum by the federating units in the exercise of their right to self-determination.
(2) That Section 2(2) of the Constitution be amended as follows:
“Nigeria shall be a Federation consisting of Regions and a Federal Capital Territory”.
(3) That Section 3(1) of the Constitution be amended as follows:
“There shall be six Regions in Nigeria (South East, South West, South-South, North East, North West and North Central) with thirty-six States as shown in the first column of Part 1 of the First Schedule to this Constitution without prejudice to the right of any region to create additional States within the Region or merge the existing States into one by a bill passed into law by the House of Parliament of the Region.”
(4) That an additional section be added as Section 3(7) as follows:
“Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 3(1) and 3(6) of this Constitution, the House of Parliament of every region shall have the power to organize the region and create such other political units as districts and councils or convert the existing states and local governments to districts and local councils in accordance with the need of the people”.
- In 2022, a member of the House of Representatives moved our Motion to divide Nigeria into six regions, but he was shouted down. The Speaker pretended not to hear the Motion. There was confusion in the House. Nevertheless, the struggle has started in the Parliament. The Motion shall be presented again in due course
Currently, the political reality is that the existing six geopolitical regions are not enough as the people of Middle Belt want a separate Region.
3. MOVING FORWARD IN THE CURRENT SITUATION:
(1) The current situation has compelled us to re-strategize and move forward with the original vision. It is not a treasonable offence to mention the name of Biafra. What ceased to exist after the Biafra-Nigeria war of 1967 – 1970 was the Republic of Biafra and not the individual Biafrans who escaped from the war as the remnants of Biafra. There is no more Republic of Biafra but there are Biafrans living in Nigeria who were not annihilated but accepted by the Nigerian Government and granted Nigerian citizenship. Indigenous People of Biafra is a nation and not an organisation owned by one man.
(2) Unfortunately, Nnamdi Kanu and his followers changed the concept and caused irreparable damage to the Struggle. We are Biafrans by indigenous identity but Nigerians by citizenship until we regain our independence by due process of law and political diplomacy. This is the same method the people of Scotland are using today in Britain. They are British by citizenship but Scottish by indigenous identity until they gain independence from Britain.
(3) We have decided to change strategies and move forward. Consequently, the Customary Government of Indigenous People of Biafra shall now be called Customary Government of Biafrans in Nigeria (CGBN) just as our political movement is called Movement of Biafrans in Nigeria (MOBIN). We emphasise our indigenous identity and respect the indigenous peoples of other regions such as the Arewa and the Oduduwa people living in Nigeria.
(4) The Memorandum submitted by MOBIN to the National Assembly for the restructuring of Nigeria by devolution of power to the geopolitical regions shall be pursued until Nigeria is restructured to six nations or eight or more nations in one in accordance with the political reality of this time. This is the same model in British politics where they have four nations in one namely: England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales. We want every region in Nigeria to be autonomous and govern itself and develop at its own pace. This is the starting point in the struggle for self-determination.
(5) NOTICE is hereby given to the general public and the Nigerian Authorities including the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Police, the Army and all the Law Enforcement Officers and Parastatals in Nigeria to respect the Biafrans living in Nigeria operating as Movement of Biafrans in Nigeria under the Customary Government.
(6) We are now agitating for Regional Autonomy of the Igbo Region. All the remnants of Biafra living in Nigeria are advised to forget the past disappointments in the Struggle and contact MOBIN by email or WhatsApp text messages for more information on the way forward. It is necessary to follow the person who knows the way. The acceptable definition of a Leader is the Person who knows the way, shows the way and goes the way. MOBIN knows the way, shows the way, and goes the way. Contact us urgently for more information,
Dated at Enugu this 1st day of January 2026
Signed:
Barr Dr Emeka Emekesiri
Chairman of MOBIN
Website: www.mobinnetwork.com
Email: mobin.hra@gmail.com
Tel: +234-810-2340-504 (Office)
+234-812-7894-931 (WhatsApp only)