By Eteteonline
The unresolved problems from the Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970) are closely linked to the sit-at-home movement.
Despite the “No Victor, No Vanquished” policy, many Igbo people experienced political marginalization, economic exclusion, and insufficient rehabilitation following the conflict.
These sentiments persisted for decades, often being voiced through protests, memorial days, and symbolic shutdowns, but not always being put into practice.
The current sit-at-home campaign took shape with the rise of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) around 2015, led by Nnamdi Kanu.
Early sit-at-home actions were symbolic and voluntary, mainly related to Biafra Remembrance Day (May 30), largely peaceful and widely accepted across the South-East.
To honor those lost in the Civil War, express disapproval of perceived injustice, and show solidarity without resorting to violence, people remained indoors. At this stage, there was little coercion.
Nnamdi Kanu’s arrest and detention (2017–2021) constituted the tipping moment. The movement solidified after Kanu’s 2017 detention and eventual release. In June 2021, he was arrested again and detained for an extended period of time.
In response, IPOB announced a weekly Monday sit-at-home to demand his release. This marked a fundamental transition from infrequent protest to routine weekly shutdown, and from voluntary compliance to fear-driven obedience.
After 2021, IPOB’s central command lost tight control over developments on the ground.
This vacuum allowed armed breakaway groups, criminal gangs, and opportunists to execute sit-at-home orders forcibly, through threats, arson attacks, and assaults on transporters and traders. Many residents complied not out of support, but out of fear. This is why governments often declare that people are not observing sit-at-home willingly.
By 2022–2024, stores, schools, and banks shut every Monday, transport collapsed weekly, the South-East lost billions of naira daily. Over time, traders grew irritated, labor felt trapped, parents worried about education, and local companies suffered long-term damage. People started to feel tired and resentful rather than sympathetic.
Charles Soludo and other South-East governors progressively proclaimed the sit-at-home policy “abolished,” stepped up security, cautioned markets against closing, and portrayed it as economic sabotage.
However, abolition on paper did not immediately abolish dread on the streets – which explains why compliance remains in some regions.
The sit-at-home endures due to persistent fear of violence, lack of trust in security guarantees, unsolved political issues, and Nnamdi Kanu’s ongoing arrest.
Therefore, the movement now focuses more on survival instincts than ideology. That’s why disputes like the one between Governor Soludo and Anambra traders are so explosive – they sit at the crossroads of history, fear, politics, and livelihood.
Add comment