The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has denied any connection with retired Department of State Services (DSS) operative, Nwaogu Ihechimere Ezeakolam, following his arraignment before a Federal High Court in Abuja over allegations that he provided support to the separatist group.
The development comes after Ezeakolam was brought before Justice Mohammed Garba Umar on Thursday on a four-count charge bordering on alleged material support for IPOB, an offence prosecutors said violates the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.
Reacting to the case, IPOB issued a statement distancing itself from the former DSS officer and insisting that he has never been a member, official, representative or operative of the organisation.
In the statement signed by its spokesman, Emma Powerful, the group said it has no knowledge of Ezeakolam and maintained that whatever legal issues exist between the retired intelligence officer and his former employers should not be linked to IPOB.
The organisation argued that simply mentioning IPOB in a criminal charge does not amount to proof that the accused belongs to the movement.
According to the group, if security agencies genuinely believe Ezeakolam is an IPOB member, they should provide verifiable evidence to support the allegation.
IPOB challenged the DSS to disclose who allegedly recruited the defendant, the unit or family he belonged to within the organisation, the position he occupied and the command structure under which he supposedly operated.
The group maintained that its membership follows an organised structure and cannot be established merely through allegations contained in court documents.
Beyond denying any association with the accused, IPOB also questioned the decision to remand the retired DSS operative at the Kuje Correctional Centre in Abuja.
The movement expressed concern that the circumstances surrounding the remand deserved closer public scrutiny, pointing to Ezeakolam’s reported background as a former intelligence officer.
According to IPOB, custodial facilities are often viewed as strategic environments for intelligence gathering, making it important for authorities to be transparent about the circumstances surrounding the defendant’s detention.
Although the organisation said it was not presenting any evidence that the remand formed part of a covert operation, it argued that the combination of the defendant’s previous role in the DSS, his prosecution and detention at Kuje was enough to warrant public vigilance.
The group warned that any attempt by serving or retired security personnel to falsely claim affiliation with IPOB in order to infiltrate or compromise individuals in custody would eventually be exposed.
It also urged Nigerians not to assume that anyone accused by security agencies automatically belongs to IPOB, stressing that allegations remain subject to judicial determination.
IPOB further claimed that reports linking individuals to the movement often emerge whenever developments concerning its detained leader, Nnamdi Kanu, begin attracting public attention.
According to the group, stories involving alleged IPOB commanders, financiers, operatives or weapons discoveries have become recurring narratives that it believes are intended to shift public focus.
The organisation also criticised what it described as selective attention to security issues.
It pointed to the recent abduction of worshippers at St. Joseph Catholic Church in Inoyi, Affa, Udi Local Government Area of Enugu State, arguing that such incidents deserve the same level of national concern as stories connected to IPOB.
Reaffirming its position, the pro-Biafra movement insisted that Ezeakolam neither represents nor speaks for IPOB and has never been authorised to act on its behalf.
The organisation maintained that it has no operational or organisational relationship with the retired DSS officer.
It called on the authorities to provide evidence in court if they insist otherwise, while respecting the constitutional presumption of innocence enjoyed by every defendant standing trial.
IPOB also demanded an independent verification of the defendant’s identity, transparency regarding the circumstances of his detention at Kuje Correctional Centre and credible evidence supporting any alleged link between him and the organisation.
The group further called for closer scrutiny of the decision to remand a retired intelligence operative in the correctional facility.
The case has attracted attention because it involves a former DSS officer accused of supporting a proscribed organisation, while that same organisation has publicly rejected any connection with him.
Legal proceedings are expected to continue before the Federal High Court in Abuja, where prosecutors will be required to prove the allegations beyond reasonable doubt.
Until the court reaches a verdict, Ezeakolam remains entitled to the constitutional presumption of innocence, while the competing claims by the prosecution and IPOB will be tested during the trial.