By Divine Sam
The arrest of Simon Ekpa, the self-proclaimed Prime Minister of Biafra, in Finland has sparked a range of reactions, particularly from stakeholders in Nigeria’s Southeast. Ekpa was arrested last week alongside four others for spreading terrorist propaganda on social media, allegedly inciting violence in Southeastern Nigeria under the guise of Biafra agitation. The Finnish authorities have charged him with public exhortation to commit offenses with terrorist intent and possible financing of terrorism.
Some Southeast leaders, like Abia South Senator Eyinnaya Abaribe, argue that the root cause of the insecurity in the region is the continued detention of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB). Abaribe believes that Kanu’s release would help distinguish between genuine agitators for Biafra and criminals masquerading as such, thus potentially reducing violence.
Meanwhile, others, such as retired US Army Captain Bishop Johnson, believe that Ekpa’s arrest could have significant implications. If Finland holds him accountable for his actions, it could cut off support for his activities in the Southeast. However, if Ekpa is extradited to Nigeria and treated similarly to Kanu—who has been held in controversial conditions—it could worsen tensions and lead to more violence in the region.
On the other hand, prominent figures like Osita Okechukwu, former Director General of Voice of Nigeria, argue that Ekpa’s arrest was long overdue. Okechukwu asserts that Ekpa’s actions have caused significant harm, including loss of life and economic disruption in the Southeast, and calls for his sentencing in either Finland or Nigeria.
Overall, the debate surrounding Ekpa’s arrest and Kanu’s detention highlights the deep divisions within the Southeast, with many seeing K
Leave a Reply