IPOB Alleges Cover-Up, Intimidation in Nnamdi Kanu’s Trial After Release of Professor Aghaji

• IPOB has alleged intimidation, medical fraud and judicial interference in Nnamdi Kanu’s trial, while claiming his personal physician was unlawfully detained over his knowledge of the IPOB leader’s medical condition.

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has alleged a coordinated campaign of intimidation and medical fraud in the ongoing legal proceedings involving its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, following the release of Emeritus Professor Martin Aghaji from detention.

In a statement issued on Sunday by IPOB spokesperson Emma Powerful, the group claimed that Aghaji, who it described as Kanu’s personal physician, was arrested during a midnight raid at his residence in Enugu before being taken to Abuja and later Lagos, where he was allegedly detained by the Department of State Services (DSS).

According to IPOB, the professor was released following pressure from Kanu’s legal team and the Nigerian Medical Association (NMA). The group commended both the lawyers and the medical association for what it described as their swift intervention.

The pro-Biafra group alleged that Aghaji’s detention was linked to his knowledge of Kanu’s medical condition and claimed that legal and medical professionals associated with the case have been subjected to intimidation, threats and unlawful detention.

IPOB further alleged that judicial officers and their families have faced pressure in connection with the trial. The group also referenced the recusal of Justice Binta Nyako from Kanu’s case, alleging that developments surrounding separate cases involving members of her family were intended to influence judicial proceedings. The allegations were not supported with evidence in the statement.

The group also questioned the handling of a medical evaluation reportedly ordered by Justice James Omotosho. IPOB claimed that although the court directed the NMA to constitute a panel of medical experts to examine Kanu, no such examination took place.

According to the statement, the association did not constitute the panel as ordered, while a medical report allegedly dated October 23, 2025, was produced despite the court order being issued on October 26, 2025. IPOB described the development as evidence of forgery and fraud on the court, allegations that have not been independently verified.

The organisation also accused Justice Omotosho of convicting Kanu under what it described as a repealed law, arguing that the matter forms part of the appeal currently before the appellate court.

Calling for international scrutiny, IPOB urged human rights organisations, as well as the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel, to examine court records and timelines relating to the case.

The group maintained that the appeal proceedings would be closely watched and reiterated its demand for Kanu’s unconditional release.

As of the time of filing this report, neither the DSS, the NMA nor the Nigerian judiciary had publicly responded to the fresh allegations contained in IPOB’s statement. The claims also remain independently unverified.