Law, justice, and the hypocrisy of Kanu’s moral posturing, by Chioma Ahaghotu

It is both ironic and tragic that Nnamdi Kanu now speaks so passionately about “law” and “justice.”

One must ask: which law and which justice did he accord to the men and women murdered under his command?

The same man who once boasted, “I decide who lives and who dies,” now wants the same legal system he scorned to protect him.

When IPOB went from agitation to violence, who gave them the authority to act as judge, jury, and executioner in Igboland?

Which court tried those they branded “saboteurs”? Which law did those victims break, and under what judicial process were they found guilty?

Their only crime, in many cases, was dissent , refusing to worship at the altar of Kanu’s c*ult of personality.

Young men were dragged from their homes, labeled traitors, and executed in cold blood. No constitution guided those ki*llings. No defense was allowed. No justice was served.

Kanu’s followers weap0nized fear and chaos in a region already bleeding from systemic neglect.

They burned, maimed, and destr0yed, claiming to fight for freedom while silencing their own people.

Now, their self-appointed supreme leader hides behind legal technicalities and constitutional protections , the very instruments he denied his victims.

And then there are the politicians who continue to dance around the edges of this tragedy.

People like Aguocha, a sitting member of the National Assembly, who openly sympathizes with Kanu and his cause.

In any “saner” political climate, a lawmaker who publicly defends a man associated with vi0lence and terror against his own people would face suspension or expulsion.

But in Nigeria’s warped political culture, sentiment is currency.

Aguocha knows that pandering to IPOB sympathizers wins applause from a loud but destructive minority.

Likewise, Abaribe built a political persona on emotional theatrics, presenting himself as the “voice” of the Igbo while constantly reinforcing the stereotype that Ndi Igbo act only from sentiment and not strategy.

Instead of offering pragmatic leadership, they play to the gallery , fanning victimhood while feeding off it. They turn collective grievances into personal profit.

The dangerous consequence of this sentimental politics is isolation.

By framing every criticism of Kanu as “an attack on the Igbo,” they have boxed the entire Southeast into a corner, further alienating us from the rest of the country and reducing complex issues to crude ethnic loyalty tests. That’s not leadership , that’s manipulation. And it is deliberate.

Law and justice cannot be selective.

They cannot exist only when convenient.

The same rule of law that Kanu now invokes is the same one he spat on when he turned Igboland into a graveyard of his own followers.

The same justice he now demands is the justice denied to those who were but*chered under his false flag of liberation.

If there is to be any redemption, it will not come from sentimental appeals or political pandering.

It will come from truth , from facing the reality that Kanu’s brand of “rev0lution” was never about freedom, but contr0l and destruction. Only the SE and Igbo people have bore that burden.

And those who still defend him are not fighting for the Igbo nation , they are feeding off its wounds.