This report delves into the recent revelations made by Aloy Ejimakor, the special counsel to Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), regarding his exchanges with Simon Ekpa, a Biafra agitator and separatist based in Finland. Ejimakor took to Twitter to share screenshots of his WhatsApp chat with Ekpa, wherein Ekpa purportedly requested a meeting with the Enugu State governor, Peter Mbah. The lawyer alleges that this move by Ekpa was an attempt to betray the detained leader, Nnamdi Kanu.
Ekpa’s Chat with Aloy Ejimakor:
According to Aloy Ejimakor’s tweet on his official handle, the conversation between him and Simon Ekpa took place on July 19. In this exchange, Ekpa allegedly urged Ejimakor to facilitate a meeting with Governor Peter Mbah. However, Ejimakor claims to have used his influence (“number six”) to thwart the meeting, as he suspected that Ekpa intended to solicit money from the governor in exchange for betraying Nnamdi Kanu.
Simon Ekpa’s Rejection of Kanu’s Order:
The report also highlights the recent development where Simon Ekpa rejected a direct order conveyed by Aloy Ejimakor on behalf of Nnamdi Kanu. The handwritten note, authenticated by both Kanu’s family and an IPOB spokesman, instructed Ekpa to immediately halt the enforcement of the sit-at-home protest in the Southeast. Despite this directive from Kanu, Ekpa chose to disregard it.
Alleged Betrayal and Implications:
Aloy Ejimakor’s sharing of the WhatsApp chat and his subsequent claim of Simon Ekpa’s alleged betrayal has raised concerns and sparked discussions within the Biafra agitator community. If true, such actions could potentially undermine the unity and purpose of the IPOB’s movement. The alleged attempt to seek monetary gains by betraying Kanu could also be seen as a betrayal of the cause itself, affecting the credibility of Ekpa as a Biafra agitator.
Conclusion:
The revelations made by Aloy Ejimakor, Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer, regarding his conversations with Simon Ekpa and Ekpa’s refusal to abide by Kanu’s orders have added a new layer of complexity to the ongoing Biafra agitation. The alleged attempts at betrayal and the rejection of directives may have significant implications for the IPOB’s cohesion and mission. It remains to be seen how the Biafra agitator community and the wider public will respond to these developments and how they will impact the pursuit of their cause going forward.
