The following claims have circulated widely, painting a picture of financial exploitation predicated on the promise of a future Biafran state:
(1) Passports for a Non-Existent Nation: Individuals reportedly paid application fees—allegedly up to $200—for Biafran passports, believing Biafra’s emergence was imminent and wishing to secure documentation ahead of a presumed rush.
(2) Payment for Political Positions: Many are said to have purchased appointments in a prospective Biafran government. They were allegedly told that all initial offices would be filled by appointment, with elections deferred for five years. This scheme is cited as a reason for the inflated number of “states” within the proposed Biafra—to create more sellable governorships. That’s the reason for thevm “40 States of Biafra” listing every local government as a state.
(3) Purchased Honors and Military Ranks: Reports suggest payments were made for promised national awards. Furthermore, ESN fighters bearing ranks like “General” or “Colonel” were allegedly told these would be their official positions in a future Biafran army, with expectations of receiving back-pay once Biafra was established in January 2026.
This context may explain certain reactions online. Some of the most aggressive attacks against critics, such as Eculaw Group and others, are purported to come from those with a vested financial interest in the promised state.
Nnamdi Kanu’s life sentence reportedly caused profound shock among such individuals, who could not reconcile the conviction with their belief in his imminent presidency. Some even called me. One of them was the man that destroyed his Nigerian passport.
Another one called me and said: “Senior man, please help me. Does it mean that all the money I paid is gone?” I managed to control my laughter as I told him that there would be no Biafra and that Kanu might be in prison for a long time. This is a serious situation.
This framework also casts Kanu’s defiant courtroom statements—such as “you can’t jail me”—in a new light. Observers note that IPOB engaged in aggressive fundraising in the trial’s final weeks. His bold declarations may have been a tactical effort to bolster follower morale and maintain financial contributions, countering fears about a potential conviction.
Ultimately, these narratives reveal a stark disconnect between the leader’s perceived reality and the legal and political facts on the ground.
By Eculaw Group