TheNewsGuru

Tag: IPOB leader

  • Nnamdi Kanu reveals reason for establishing IPOB, Radio Biafra

    Nnamdi Kanu reveals reason for establishing IPOB, Radio Biafra

    The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has admitted before the Federal High Court, Abuja, that he founded both IPOB and Radio Biafra.

    TheNewsGuru reports that Kanu’s trial began again following the re-assignment of his case to another judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja. Kanu had demanded the recusal of Justice Binta Nyako who had presided over his case since its inception.

    Speaking during the proceedings on Monday, the IPOB leader said he established the movement and the online radio platform to promote the welfare and interests of the Igbo people.

    My broadcasts were always public

    Kanu denied allegations that IPOB operates as a secretive organization, asserting that all his broadcasts on Radio Biafra were public and streamed live on Facebook. “All my broadcasts were public and accessible to everyone. IPOB is not a secret organization,” he stated.

    Kanu Denies Working With Others

    Kanu also maintained that he operated independently and personally managed all Radio Biafra broadcasts, when he was questioned by the Department of State Services (DSS) about his associates.

     He emphasized that he did not collaborate with any external individuals in the operation of the movement’s communication channels. Meanwhile, the presiding judge ordered that a video recording of Kanu’s interrogation session with the DSS be played in open court as part of the ongoing trial.

    More details

  • Identity of Nnamdi Kanu’s new judge revealed as IPOB leader’ fresh trial begins March 21

    Identity of Nnamdi Kanu’s new judge revealed as IPOB leader’ fresh trial begins March 21

    A new judge has been assigned to adjudicate on the case against Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB),at  the Federal High Court in Abuja on March 21, 2025.

    TheNewsGuru reports that the leader of the IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, had called for Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja to recuse herself from his trial.

    In response to his request, Justice Nyako stepped down from the case; however, the Chief Judge of the Abuja Federal High Court overruled her decision.

    In December, Justice Nyako indefinitely adjourned Kanu’s case. In light of these events, Nnamdi Kanu vowed that he would not appear in court again until an impartial judge is assigned to his case.

    Kanu’s lead Counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, in a recent interview said the legal team is ready for the commencement of the fresh trial.

    Ejimakor noted that Kanu’s legal team had not been served with the charges he would face before Justice Omotosho.

    He said: “It’s now official that Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu shall appear before a new Judge on 21st March 2025. It’s a milestone; and we are primed & ready.

    “He will appear before Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in court 7.

    “The case will start new like it has never held before. Everything that was done from 2015 when he was arrested to the last time that he appeared before Justice Binta Nyako are gone including the appeals that are pending, they are gone out of the window.

    “He would be rearraigned on charges that we have not seen, we can mention that we received a hearing notice but no charges have been sent to us

    “We really don’t know the charges we are facing on March 24. The government has a trick they always do, they will serve you a day before the hearing so that you don’t have time to study the charges.

    “Sometimes they serve you when you are in court but the charges would have been in the court registry and we can’t start asking the court to give us copy.

  • Supreme Court judgement has opened a new legal window for my release – Nnamdi Kanu

    Supreme Court judgement has opened a new legal window for my release – Nnamdi Kanu

    Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB) has explained that the Supreme Court judgement has opened a new legal window for his release.

    Kanu gave this explanation during his routine meeting with his legal team, led by his special counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, and Barrister Nnaemeka, at the Abuja facility of the Department of State Services, DSS.

    However, the IPOB leader expressed disappointment with the judgement.

    Posting on X, Ejimakor wrote: “UPDATE: I met with #MNK today in tow with Barr Nnaemeka.

    “Onyendu expressed his profound disappointment with the Supreme Court judgment but he believes that aspects of the judgement have opened a new legal window to pursue his release. He asked all and sundry to remain confident.”

    Recall that the Supreme Court recently turned down an appeal to release the embattled IPOB leader from detention.

    In its judgement delivered by Justice Emmanuel Agim but written by Justice Garba Lawal, the Supreme Court upturned the Appeal Court ruling that discharged and acquitted Kanu of all terrorism charges in October 2022.

    The Supreme Court held that although the Nigerian government recklessly and unlawfully rendered Kanu from Kenya, such an unlawful act has not divested any court from proceeding with trial.

    Justice Lawal held that no Nigerian law was cited in the suit seeking Kanu’s release from unlawful abduction from Kenya

  • Appeal Court suspends execution of judgment setting Kanu free

    Appeal Court suspends execution of judgment setting Kanu free

    The Court of Appeal on Friday espoused the Federal Government’s application for stay of execution of the October 13 judgment which set the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, free.

    Justice Haruna Tsanammi also ordered that the result of the ruling be forwarded to the Supreme Court within seven days for an expeditious hearing.

    Following this development, means Kanu, the self-styled leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra, is expected to remain in the custody of the Department of State Services pending when the Supreme Court hears the case.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) recalls that the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, had asserted that Kanu was merely discharged but not acquitted.

    However, Kanu’s lawyer, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor, was enthused that he had been freed from charges against him.

    According to the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, in an interview, the IPOB leader’s rendition could not be used as the only basis to free him of other offences allegedly committed by him against the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    Recall that the Umuahia Division of the Federal High Court, had on Wednesday, October 26, ordered the federal government to return Kanu, to Kenya from where he was repatriated to Nigeria on June 19, 2021.

    Delivering judgement, Justice Evelyn Anyadike, also awarded N500 million in general damages to the IPOB leader.

    Malami said, “To release or not to release Nnamdi Kanu is a function of law and the rule of law for that matter. In arriving at a decision on whether to release or not release, is one; you look at the rule of law, two; you look at the public and the national interest, three; you look at the security situation, four; you look at international diplomacy.

    “Let me talk first of the rule of law. This is someone that has been granted bail on account of charges that have been preferred against him at the court. Someone jumping bail to the international community, a case of a fugitive is established against the background of jumping the bail.

    The fact that you have indeed succeeded in one case as against multiple others that are pending goes to establish the fact that that case cannot be the only basis and criteria for determining whether you are entitled to be released or not
    “Two, arising from the national security, this is someone that is charged with treason, incitement and destruction of civil authority, murder and assassination of others on account of his incitement, that boil down to issues of national security and criminality.

    “Three, on account of international diplomacy, this is someone that has against his person, used the international community or a foreign country to launch an attack against a nation, against his nation for that matter.

    “So, all these naturally come into play to determine what to do. So, if you have through judicial processes established multiple cases of treason, homicide, bail-jumping among others; the fact that you have indeed succeeded in one case as against multiple others that are pending goes to establish the fact that that case cannot be the only basis and criteria for determining whether you are entitled to be released or not.”

    The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory had earlier, upheld the appeal of the detained activist and discharged him of treason charges.

  • Ejimakor clears air on Nnamdi Kanu’s extraordinary rendition judgment set for Oct 27

    Ejimakor clears air on Nnamdi Kanu’s extraordinary rendition judgment set for Oct 27

    Aloy Ejimakor, a counsel of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, has cleared the air on whether the judgment of the Federal High Court in Umuahia, Abia State, on the extraordinary rendition of his client from Kenya to Nigeria would go on as scheduled following the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abuja on October 13.

    In a press release on Wednesday, Ejimakor said the issues and reliefs before the Court of Appeals in Abuja are markedly different from the issues and reliefs pending judgment before the Federal High Court, Umuahia.

    He said, “To be sure, the sole reason for the common presence of extraordinary rendition in both cases is because I had, as far back as August 2021, take it before the State High court in Umuahia and later to the Federal High court.

    “In summary, the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abuja considered the narrow issue of the impact of extraordinary rendition on the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in Abuja to subject Mazi Nnamdi Kanu to trial. Conversely, the issues or prayers before the Federal High Court, Umuahia are many and different from the narrow issue of jurisdiction decided in the Abuja judgment.

    “For ease of reference, I will reproduce below the prayers pending before Umuahia and which were not specifically and fundamentally considered or captured by the judgment in Abuja. They are:

    “1, A DECLARATION that the arrest of the Applicant in Kenya by the Respondents’ agents without due process of law is arbitrary, and the Respondents’ enforced disappearance of the Applicant for eight (8) days and their refusal to produce the Applicant before a Kenyan Court for the purpose of Applicant’s extradition is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amount to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right against arbitrary arrest, to his personal liberty and to fair hearing as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter.

    “2, A DECLARATION that the detention of the Applicant in a non-official secret facility in Kenya and the torture of the Applicant in Kenya by the Respondents’ agents is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amount to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right against unlawful detention, torture and to fair hearing, as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter).

    “3, A DECLARATION that, pursuant to Article 12(4) of the Charter, the expulsion (or extraordinary rendition) of the Applicant from Kenya to Nigeria by the Respondents without a decision taken in accordance with the law of Kenya is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amounts to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right to fair hearing and not to be expelled from a State Party to the Charter except by virtue of a decision taken in accordance with the law, as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter.

    “4, A DECLARATION that any criminal prosecution of the Applicant the purpose of which the Respondents unlawfully expelled the Applicant from Kenya to Nigeria is illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and amounts to infringement of the Applicant’s fundamental right to fair hearing, as enshrined and guaranteed under the pertinent provisions of CFRN and the Charter.

    “5, AN ORDER OF INJUNCTION restraining and prohibiting the Respondents from taking any further step in any criminal prosecution of the Applicant enabled by the said unlawful expulsion of the Applicant from Kenya to Nigeria.

    “6, AN ORDER mandating and compelling the Respondents to forthwith restitute or otherwise restore the Applicant to his liberty, same being his state of being as of 19th June 2021; and to thereupon repatriate the Applicant to his country of lawful domicile (to wit: the United Kingdom) to await the outcome of any formal request the Respondents may file before the competent authorities in Britain for the lawful extradition of the Applicant to Nigeria.

    “7, AN ORDER mandating and compelling the Respondents to issue an official Letter of Apology to the Applicant for the infringement of his fundamental rights; and publication of said Letter of Apology in three (3) national dailies.

    “8, AN ORDER mandating and compelling the Respondents to pay the sum of N25,000,000,000.00 (Twenty-Five Billion Naira) to the Applicant, being monetary damages claimed by the Applicant against the Respondents jointly and severally for the physical, mental, emotional, psychological, property and other damages suffered by the Applicant as a result of the infringements of Applicant’s fundamental rights by the Respondents.”

    The lawyer noted that in summary, the case in Umuahia borders on fundamental rights, whereas the judgment in Abuja bordered on jurisdiction.

    “In conclusion, as the public has been previously informed by my clients, there is no Sit-at-home on the judgment day of 27th October 2022. Please be guided accordingly,” he added.

  • ‘Release Nnamdi Kanu to end insecurity in Southeast’ – Amaechi advises Buhari

    The first Republic Aviation Minister, Mbazulike Amaechi, has appealed to President Muhammadu Buhari, to release the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, for peace to reign in the Southeast.

    According to Amaechi, Kanu’s release would end the spate of insecurity in the Southeast.

    He noted that most criminals claiming to be agitating for Kanu would go into hiding if the IPOB leader is released.

    “There is only one key to the solution to killings in Igbo land now, and that is the release of Nnamdi Kanu. If that young man is released, you will see all these criminals who spring up claiming to be agitating for the release of Nnamdi Kanu while their real intention is to rob innocent and unsuspecting people, will go into hiding because they will have nothing as a reason to come out.

    “IPOB has disowned them and has even taken measures to apprehend them but as you know, criminals will have their ways of operating and claiming one fake thing or the other, but they are simple criminals operating one way or the other,” Amaechi spoke to journalists yesterday as part of events to mark his 94th birthday.”

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports that Kanu, who earlier spoke from detention, revealed how he was arrested in Kenya.

    First Republic Aviation Minister, Mbazulike Amaechi

    The leader of the pro-Biafra group was brought back to Nigeria to face a treason trial.

    Aloy Ejimakor, Special Counsel to Kanu, asserted that the IPOB leader told him that “the people that abducted him said that they were told by their sponsors that Kanu was a Nigerian terrorist linked to the Islamic terrorists in Kenya, presumably Al-Shabab.

    “But after several days when they discovered his true identity, they tended to treat him less badly. Despite that, they told him they felt committed to hand him over to those that hired them,” Ejimakor said.

    Al-Shabab, a terrorist, jihadist group based in East Africa and Yemen, for decades has been carrying out deadly attacks in Kenya.

    The Nigerian government must have contracted a third party, probably outside the knowledge and involvement of the Kenyan government, for the “interception” of Kanu, going by the revelations from the IPOB leader.

    Kanu said he was held incommunicado and chained to a bare floor for eight days in a nondescript private facility in Kenya.

    He said no warrant of arrest was shown to him or even mentioned to him, according to Ejimakor.

    “Kanu was in point of fact tortured and subjected to untold cruel and inhuman treatment in Kenya. He said his abductors disclosed to him that they abducted him at the behest of the Nigerian government,” the lawyer said.

    “He was blindfolded and driven to the tarmac very close to the plane without passing through the airport immigration. The plane departed Nairobi at about 12 p.m. and arrived in Abuja in the evening.

    “Kanu was flown to Abuja in the private jet on Sunday 27th June 2021 from Jomo Kenyatta International Airport, Nairobi and he was the lone passenger,” he added.

    Ejimakor said Kanu was interviewed for the first time by three SSS officers, in his presence.

    “The interview was revealing as it contained certain new allegations that were never heard of before. But all the questions relate directly or indirectly to his status as the leader of IPOB.

    “I observed that despite what he has passed through, he was in high spirits and looked forward to overcoming the extraordinary rendition that brought him to Nigeria,” the lawyer said.

    “In my assessment of how the case now stands, I wager that before any court can subject Kanu to trial for any offenses, it has to first conduct a trial within a trial on the grievous incident that forced him to leave Nigeria and the equally grievous incident that forced him back to Nigeria. No court of law, conscience and equity will overlook those two supervening incidents and proceed to trial,” Ejimakor stated.

    The Nigerian authorities have accused Kanu of ‘orchestrating’ the killings of about 60 people, including security officials in the country’s Southeast region.

    IPOB, which had been proscribed by the Nigerian government, has denied being responsible for the killings.

    Kanu, a British-Nigerian citizen, is known to have been residing in the UK after he jumped bail and fled Nigeria in 2017 during his trial for treasonable felony.

    His country home, in the South-east, had earlier been raided by Nigerian security forces before he fled the country.

  • SECRET TRIAL: IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu challenges practice direction of FHC

    SECRET TRIAL: IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu challenges practice direction of FHC

    Following an order for a secret trial by the Federal High Court, FHC, on the case of the detained leader of Indigenous People of Biafra, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, he has gone to court to challenge the practice direction.

     

    The IPOB leader asked the court to declare that the provisions of Order III of the Federal High Court Practice Directions (On Trial of Terrorism Cases) 2022, were already the subject of Section 36 (4)(a) and (b) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, and consequently, “they areotiose, inoperative and outrightly ultra vires.”

     

    Kanu in the origination summons filed by his lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, asked the court to declare it “invalid, null, void and of no effect whatsoever.”

     

    The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, and its Chief Registrar were listed as defendants in the suit which processes were obtained by journalists on Monday.

     

    Justice John Tsoho had released a new practice direction for the trial of terrorism cases before the court.

     

    The cases of Nnamdi Kanu, Bureau de Change operators indicted over sponsorship of terrorism, and Boko Haram suspects are currently before the court.

     

    Justice Tsoho said the new practice direction was in the exercise of his constitutional powers as enshrined in Section 254 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

     

    Under the new arrangement, the court said media coverage of proceedings is strictly prohibited.

     

    “Coverage of proceedings under these practice directions is strictly prohibited, save as may be directed by the court. A person who contravenes an order or direction made under these practices shall be deemed to have committed an offence contrary to Section 34(5) of the Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011 as amended,” the document stated.

     

    The IPOB leader also wants an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants , whether by themselves, servants, agents, privies, and all other officers and agents of the Federal High Court of Nigeria from applying and enforcing the provisions of the Federal High Court Practice Directions (On Trial of Terrorism Cases) 2022.

     

    Others reliefs were “A declaration that the failure of the 1st defendant to first seek and obtain the approval of the Federal Executive Council (or the National Council of Ministers) of the Federal Republic of Nigeria prior to enacting the Federal High Court Practice Directions (on Trials of Terrorism Cases), 2022, as required by Section 44 of the Federal High Court Act renders the Federal High Court Practice Direction (On Trial of Terrorism Cases) 2022, ultra vires, null and void.

     

    “A declaration that Order III Rules 3(b) and (d) of the Federal High Court Practice Directions (On Trials of Terrorism Cases) 2022, which respectively empower a Federal High Court trying terrorism cases “to receive evidence by video link, and to receive written deposition of expert witness” are inconsistent with Items 23 and 68 of the Exclusive Legislative List as well as Paragraph 2(b) of Part III of the 2nd Schedule to the Constitution which confers on the National Assembly the exclusive power to make rules of evidence, both substantive and adjectival and are therefore ultra vires, null and void to the extent of the inconsistency.

     

    “A declaration that Order IV Rule 2 of the Federal High Court Practice Direction (on Trial of Terrorism Cases) 2022, which provides that a person who contravenes an order or direction made under these Directions shall be deemed to have committed an offence contrary to Section 34(5) of the Terrorism (Prevention) Act 2011, (as amended) isotiose and inoperative because the National Assembly had already covered the field vide Section 34(5) of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2011, as amended.

     

    “A declaration that the rule-making powers of the 1st Defendant under Section 254 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended, is limited to the premises of the Federal High Court and do not extend to outside its perimeters, which are under the exclusive responsibility of law enforcement agencies such as the Police, DSS, etc; and

     

    “An order of this Honorable court declaring the Federal High Court Practice Directions (On Trial of Terrorism Cases) 2022, unconstitutional ultra vires, invalid, null, void, and of no effect.”

  • Unknown gunmen in southeast threaten to stop elections over detention of Nnamdi Kanu

    Unknown gunmen in southeast threaten to stop elections over detention of Nnamdi Kanu

    Unknown gunmen terrorizing major parts of Nigeria’s southeast region have released 2 minutes 55 seconds video shot in a forest, as they demand the release of the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, before any election would be allowed to take place in the region.

     

    Kanu is being held by the Department of State Services (DSS) at its headquarters in Abuja, after the Nigerian government repatriated him from Kenya in June 2021, an action his lawyers termed “illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional extradition”.

     

    He is standing trial on charges bordering on treasonable felony and terrorism before the court.

     

    In the words of a member of the unknown gunmen: “We the unknown gunmen in Biafraland have come to make our position known to the public. We are here to protect our fatherland by all means. We don’t have any sponsors. And we are not planning to have.

     

    “We are not under the command of Simon Ekpa, DOS or Uwazuruike. Any government giving any of these people money is wasting their time. Only the release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu can calm us down. Monday sit-at-home is sacrosanct. Nothing can stop it apart from the release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

     

    “There shall be no election, and anybody that attempts any election matter will die. And for the INEC people, what will happen to you when we get you, only God knows, no more posters, political posters in Biafra land, if you try us, you campaigning, fire will burn you, fake Biafra media, you think you can post rubbish, we the unknown gunmen have endured enough from you. We shall no longer tolerate any rubbish.”

  • Nnamdi Kanu’s American Lawyer drags Malami, Justice Nyako to ICC

    Nnamdi Kanu’s American Lawyer drags Malami, Justice Nyako to ICC

    The Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, has been dragged before the International Criminal Court, ICC, by Bruce Fein, the United States counsel of Nnamdi Kanu, pro-Biafra agitator, over a criminal complaint.

     

    Fein also filed a criminal complaint against Justice Binta Nyako of an Abuja Federal High Court.

     

    He charged Malami and Nyako with conspiring with President Muhammadu Buhari and Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta, “to commit crimes against humanity”.

     

    In a tweet on Thursday, Fein wrote:

     

    “Today, I filed a criminal complaint with the International Court of Justice against Nigerian Attorney General Malami and Federal High Court Justice Nyako charging them with conspiring with Nigerian President Buhari and Kenyan President Kenyatta to commit crimes against humanity.”

  • Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer, Ejimakor says IPOB leader will be released on May 18

    Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer, Ejimakor says IPOB leader will be released on May 18

    Aloy Ejimakor, Special Counsel to Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, has said that his client would be granted bail on May 18, 2022.

     

    In a tweet, Ejimakor, wrote: “Congratulations to my colleagues who were on ground yesterday to receive the 8-count strike out.

     

    “It’s great that the Umuahia judgment was brought to bear on the bail application moved by SAN Ozekhome. I’m confident that #MNK will make bail on 18th May. Team work pays. #Igwebuike.”

     

    Ejimakor was reacting to yesterday’s ruling by an Abuja Federal High Court, that struck out eight out of the 15-count charges against Kanu.

     

    Justice Binta Nyako struck out the eight count charges on the grounds that the proof of evidence did not link Kanu to the charges.

     

    The judge delivered a ruling on a preliminary objection the Biafran leader raised against all the charges.

     

    “I have read the counts and counts 6,7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14 have not disclosed any offense against the defendent.

     

    “‘Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 15 shows some allegations. The court shall proceed to try the defendant on those count,” the Judge ruled.

     

    Following the ruling, the judge had slated hearing for Kanu’s bail application for May 18, 2022.