The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has firmly stated that the sit-at-home observed on Monday, February 2, 2026, in parts of Onitsha, Anambra State, was an isolated and spontaneous expression of discontent—not a reinstatement of the former weekly Monday sit-at-home policy in the South-East.
In a statement issued by IPOB’s Media and Publicity Secretary, Comrade Emma Powerful, the group distanced itself from any suggestion that the action marked a return to regular lockdowns. Powerful explained that the one-day observance was a direct reaction to what IPOB described as the “increasingly authoritarian posture” of Anambra State Governor, Professor Chukwuma Charles Soludo, particularly in relation to recent tensions involving traders in Onitsha.
Powerful emphasised that IPOB has not reversed its earlier decision to cancel the Monday sit-at-home order.
He recalled the history of the policy:
“The Monday sit-at-home began in August 2021 as a non-violent demand for the unconditional release of our leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, who was then in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS). Following widespread concerns about its negative impact on the Igbo economy and the livelihood of our people, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu himself directed that the action be cancelled.”
Powerful noted that the cancellation was widely welcomed across the South-East, and IPOB has since repeatedly dissociated itself from criminal elements who continued to enforce sit-at-home through violence, intimidation, and coercion after the official suspension.
He insisted that it is unfair and misleading to continue linking IPOB to any Monday shutdowns that occurred post-cancellation.
While IPOB has occasionally called for voluntary sit-at-home on days when Kanu appeared in court, Powerful described these as limited, non-coercive expressions of solidarity rather than enforced directives.
“The sit-at-home observed on Monday, February 2, 2026, was not a policy shift by IPOB,” he stated clearly.
He further explained that IPOB members—who are predominantly traders, artisans, transporters, small business owners, and daily wage earners—have no interest in actions that disrupt economic activity. “We do not take pleasure in sit-at-home,” he said, “but when an elected Igbo governor threatens citizens with demolitions and force—especially at a time when Igbo properties are being destroyed in other parts of the country—people are bound to express displeasure.”
Powerful warned that attempts to suppress peaceful expressions of anger over Kanu’s continued detention through intimidation would only deepen resentment and mistrust among the Igbo population.
He also directed sharp criticism at the South-East Governors’ Forum, accusing them of showing little genuine interest in securing Kanu’s release and questioning why some governors appeared to actively support his conviction despite what IPOB views as a lack of credible evidence.
Reiterating IPOB’s long-standing position, Powerful stated that the weekly sit-at-home had been ended long ago and would not be reintroduced. He assured that IPOB would continue to make it clear that there would be no enforcement of any sit-at-home going forward.
“We do not want Igbo traders harassed or threatened for choosing to open their businesses,” he said.
The spokesperson concluded by calling for dialogue, justice, and respect for the rule of law as the only sustainable path forward. He stressed that the underlying issue extends beyond IPOB to the broader sense of injustice felt by many Igbo people, and that collective punishment or intimidation would never resolve the root causes of tension.
The clarification comes amid ongoing debates over governance, security, and civil liberties in the South-East, as well as persistent calls for the release of Nnamdi Kanu, whose appeal against his terrorism conviction and life imprisonment is currently before the Court of Appeal in Abuja.
