Tag: IPOB

Nnamdi Kanu prays Supreme Court to set aside stay of execution judgment

The leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu, on Thursday, prayed the Supreme Court to set aside the ruling of the Court of Appeal staying the execution of the judgment discharging him.

The prayer is contained in court papers obtained by newsmen dated Nov. 3.

Kanu noted that the court erred in law when it proceeded to hear and determine an application for stay of execution of judgment in a criminal appeal, brought under Order 6 Rule 1 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2021, and Section 17 of the Court of Appeal Act of 2004, and thereby occasioned a miscarriage of justice.

Both the Court of Appeal Rules 2021 and Court of Appeal Act, 2004, did not make any provisions for stay of execution of a Court of Appeal judgment in a criminal appeal.

He said that court erred in law when it failed to properly assess or evaluate or appraise the evidence led by and on behalf of the Appellant and consequently arrived at a wrong conclusion.

He sought for an order restoring the efficacy of the judgment of the court below which has not in any way been set aside by a higher court.

And for such further order or orders as the court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of the appeal.

Newsmen reports that the appellate court had on Oct. 13, freed Kanu of the terrorism and treasonable felony charges preferred against him by the Federal Government.

The three-member panel had in the judgment set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which quashed eight out of the 15 counts of the charge preferred against Kanu.

In the unanimous judgment delivered by Justice Oludotun Adefope-Okojie, the Appeal Court declared as illegal and unlawful the abduction of Kanu from Kenya to Nigeria and quashed the entire seven charges retained by the trial court against him on the ground that the Federal Government breached all local and international laws in the forceful extradition of Kanu to Nigeria, thereby making the terrorism charges against him incompetent and unlawful.

The Federal Government applied for a stay of execution order, urging the court not to release Kanu as he was seen as a flight risk and security threat to the country.

The court granted the federal government’s application for stay of judgment discharging Kanu, of terrorism charge

November 3, 2022
Nnamdi Kanu: FG is justified within the context of law not to release IPOB leader -AGF Malami

…he can only be released after all legal angles within rule of law have been exhausted

…says Buhari’s govt has done well in its anti-graft war

The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami has explained why the leader of IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu cannot be released despite the court verdicts that set him free recently stating that within the context of the law Federal Government is justified in still holding him in custody.

Malami who explained this in an interview he granted a national daily said: “To release or not to release Nnamdi Kanu is a function of the law and the rule of law for that matter.

“In arriving at a decision whether to release or not release, 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, and four; you look at international diplomacy.

“Let me first talk about 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.

“To the international community, a case of fugitive is established against the background of bail jumping. Two, arising from national security, this is someone that is charged with treason, incitement of the public, destruction of civil authority, a kind of murder and assassination of others on account of his incitement. That boils down to issues that bother us on issues of national security and criminality.

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

“So all these naturally come into play to determine what you do. So, if you have equally gone through judicial processes, multiple cases, a case of treason, a case of homicide, a case of jumping bail, among others, the fact that you have indeed succeeded in one case as opposed to 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.

“So the simple question is, whether what the Federal Government has done, by way of not releasing Kanu, is justified within the context of the rule of law, and my answer is yes; it is justified. This is because the single case that has been determined is not the only pending case against Kanu, as there are other multiple cases associated with treason.

“There exist multiple appeals that are pending and yet to be determined, and then again, there are international public interest dimensions, and the essence of the government is the sustenance of the public and not an individual interest.

Asked whether the Federal Government would have moved Kanu back to Kenya as ordered by the court, Malami said”When the cases are exhausted, when within the context of the rule of law and the decisions and conclusions are in his favour, the government will comply.

“But whatever option is open and available to the government, the government will exploit it within the context of the rule of law, within the context of the rights available at his disposal.

On what he has achieved as AGF, Malami said:”Well, it all depends of the perspective of which you look at it. If you look at it from the perspective of the fight against corruption for example, which is the major policy drive of the Federal Government under the Change Agenda that brought the Buhari administration into government, we have made tremendous achievements.

“Before we came on board you would recall that a single agency of government for example EFCC recorded around 160 records of convictions.

“Now, looking at it from what we have done in terms of enforcement as it relates to the fight against corruption, as at last week, within this year alone, we have over 2,665 convictions.

” So if you are looking at it from the point of enforcement, a government that succeeded within a year in securing 2,665 convictions by one single agency of government EFCC, even when you have in place additional convictions secured by Federal Ministry of Justice, NDLEA and ICPC, it is a clear proof of establishment of success in the field of enforcement.

“Now, if you’re looking at it from the international perception, international assessment of the situation, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes, UNODC, by its assessment of the Nigerian situation, assessing about 17 indices of the fight against corruption has established by its 2019 report that the Nigerian government has succeeded in multiplying its success in respect of about 17 items. I am talking of enforcement. Now if you are talking of international recognition as well arising from what our president has been doing as it relates to the Open Government Partnership, arising from what we have been doing as it relates to prevention, our president has been recognized as the champion of anti-corruption by African Union, AU.

“Now if you are looking at policies for example, what policies do we have in place that establish that we are indeed excelling in the fight against corruption?

“We have succeeded in deploying technology which has effectively worked well on the issues that bother on bank verification, treasury single account, national extractive industry and associated things, having in place executive orders particularly Executive Order No 6, which has indeed all summed up to support what we are doing.

” If you are looking at our success in terms of legislations, we can say that this is one government ever since the establishment of Nigeria as a country that has succeeded in having multiple legislative frameworks that support the fight against corruption.

” If you are talking of legislations and enforcement, we have succeeded in money laundry prevention and prohibition, Proceeds of Crime Act among others, Terrorism and Administration of Criminal Justice Act.

Source: Vanguard

November 1, 2022
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.

October 28, 2022
Nnamdi Kanu was merely discharged but not acquitted- Malami

Regardless of a court ruling asking the federal government to return the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, to Kenya and pay him N500 million as compensation, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, has maintained that he (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.

TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) recalls 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. Confusion however arose over the interpretation of the Abuja Appeal Court judgement.

October 28, 2022
Nnamdi Kanu files N100bn suit against FG over continued detention

The leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a N100 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Federal Government over his continued detention by the Department of State Services, (DSS).

In the suit filed at the Federal High Court Abuja, Kanu is seeking his immediate release from the facility of the DSS and payment of N100 billion reparation for the violation of his rights to liberty and dignity of human person.

Kanu said the suit became necessary following the continued failure of the Federal Government to obey the judgment of the Court of Appeal, delivered on Oct.13, which discharged him of the terrorism charge brought against him.

The originating court process, filed by Mr. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, on behalf of Kanu, dated Oct. 21 has the suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1945/2022.

Kanu said the suit was predicated on provisions of the 1999 Constitution.

“By virtue of Section 46(1) of the 1999 Constitution and Order 1 Rule 2(1) of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, any person who alleges that any of the Provisions of Chapter 4 of the constitution to which he is entitled to, has been, is being or is likely to be contravened in any state in relation to him, may apply to the High Court in the State for redress.”

By the suit, Kanu wants a declaration that his continued detention by the government from Oct. 13 till date, is illegal, unlawful, oppressive, unconscionable, and unconstitutional.

“It violates my fundamental rights to dignity of human persons, personal liberty and right to freedom of movement as guaranteed by sections 34, 35, 36, 39, and 41 of the 1999 Constitution.

Kanu is also seeking an order
directing the respondents to unconditionally release him from their custody forthwith.

The applicant is also praying for an order restraining the respondents from further interfering with his rights or dealing with him in a manner inimical to his fundamental rights guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution.

In addition, he is seeking compensatory and exemplary damage of N100 billion against the respondents for the violation of the his rights.

October 26, 2022
Nnamdi Kanu: Appeal Court clears air on Transfer of 21 Judges

The Court of Appeal says the transfer of 21 justices to various divisions has nothing to do with the judgment of the court that discharged and quashed the terrorism charges against the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.

Contrary to some media reports, the appellate court said that the postings of 21 out of its 81 justices was a routine exercise aimed at reinvigorating the justice delivery of the court.

This is contained in a statement by the Chief Registrar of the Court, Malam Umar Bangari.

The appellate court said the three justices who delivered the Oct. 13 judgment that ordered the release of Kanu from detention were not transferred.

Bangaru said that only one justice out of the three that handled Kanu’s matter was affected by the transfer.

“The attention of the Court of Appeal has been drawn to a publication in the media on Oct. 24 with a caption “Nnamdi Kanu: 3 Justices on Appeal Court Panel Transferred.

“The publication in question conveyed the innuendo to the effect that the recent posting of justices of the Court of Appeal was in connection with or in response to the judgment of the Court of Oct.13 in Nnamdi Kanu versus the Federal Government.

“We wish to state categorically that the general posting of the justices of the Court of Appeal under reference was routine and aimed at reinvigorating the justice delivery system of the court.

“In fact, 21 out of 81 justices including 6 presiding justices of the court were affected by the general postings.

“It is therefore incorrect to insinuate that the justices who delivered the judgment in the Nnamdi Kanu appeal were the target of the routine posting exercise.”

The chief registrar said that the court had an open door policy of providing easy access to the media to make inquiries and seek clarification on any matter of interest to the media for the benefit of the general public.

October 25, 2022
Nnamdi Kanu: Appeal Court Justices transferred days after delivering judgment

Barely seven days after three Justices sat on the Court of Appeal panel that quashed the 15-count terrorism charge the Federal Government preferred against the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, they have been transferred from their various divisions.

It was gathered that the presiding Justice, Jummai Hanatu Sankey, who was hitherto in the Gombe Division of the court, has been moved to Awka Division, Justice Oludotun Adetope-Okojie who delivered the lead judgment, was transferred to Owerri, while the third member of the panel, Justice Ebiowei Tobi, was moved to Gombe.

A memo dated October 17, which was signed by the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, stressed that the new posting for the justices was with immediate effect as they were expected to report to their new stations by October 21.

TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) recalls that delivering judgment in an appeal filed by Kanu, a three-member panel led by Justice Hanatu Sankey, in a unanimous judgment, held that the respondent, by not responding to the appellant’s submissions, conceded to the allegation that Kanu was forcefully renditioned from Kenya to Nigeria.

The judgment read by Justice Adedotun Adefope-Okijie held that it was necessary for the federal government to prove the legality of Kanu’s arrival to Nigeria.

The appellate court held that the respondent flouted the Terrorism Act and was also in violation of all known international conventions and treaties guiding the extradition process thus, breaching the rights of the defendant.

The court further held that having illegally and forcefully renditioned the appellant, the trial court is stripped of jurisdiction to continue to try Kanu.

The appellate court held that the federal government’s action “tainted the entire proceedings” it initiated against Kanu and amounted to “an abuse of criminal prosecution in general”.

“The court will never shy away from calling the Executive to order when it tilts towards executive recklessness. Therefore, the appeal has merit,” the appellate court held.

Arguing the appeal, Kanu’s lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, on Sept. 13, told the three-man panel that Kanu was first arraigned on December 23, 2015 and granted bail on April 25, 2017.

He explained further that agents of the federal government (the respondent) had launched a military operation, code-named “Operation Python Dance” at the appellant’s home town in September 2017, which forced him to escape out of the country, to Isreal, then London.

He recalled that on June 27 2021, “the federal government forcefully arrested Kanu in Kenya and renditioned him back to Nigeria “in most cruel and inhuman manner”.

“On 29 June, 2021, the appellant was taken to court by the federal government, where he was re-arraigned.

“Following the appellant’s preliminary objection to the 15-count charge preferred against him by the federal government, the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal Hight Court Abuja, on April 8, 2022, struck out 8 counts.

“Our humble submission is that the remaining seven counts ought not to be retained by the trial court because, before the time Kanu was renditioned to Nigeria from Kenya, he was facing a five-count charge”.

Ozekhome submitted that going by section 15 of the Extradition Act, “Kanu is not supposed to be charged without the approval of Kenyan government.

“The remaining 7 counts, cannot stand, being filed illegally without following due process under the rule of specialty as envisaged under section 15 of the Extradition Act.

“Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8, which were retained by the Federal High Court, were offences allegedly committed by the appellant (Kanu) before his forceful rendition to Nigeria.

“These allegations of rendition were never denied by the federal government and you cannot sustain the charge when you extradited the appellant without the approval of Kenyan authority.

In addition, Ozekhome argued that when charging for an offence, “you must mention the particulars and location where the office was committed.

“But in this case, the appellant was charged without stating where the offence was allegedly committed.

Kanu’s lawyer contended that by section 45 (a) of the Federal High Court Act, with regard to the criminal charge, the trial court does not have “global jurisdiction”.

More so, “Section 195 and 196 of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), state that a charge must have a date, time, location etc.

He insisted that there was no need for the FHC to retain the remaining 7 counts, and therefore urged the panel to take over the charges and strike them out.

The senior lawyer also asked the appellate panel to hold that the respondent has not furnished the court with any prima facie case against the appellant for which he is being charged.

Reacting, the Federal Government’s lawyer, Mr David Kaswe urged the court to dismiss the appeal for lacking in merit.

He specifically prayed the appellate court review the April 8 ruling of the trial court which struck out only eight out of the 15-count charge.

Insisting that the charge FG entered against him had no basis in law, Kanu, in his appeal dated April 29 and marked CA/ABJ/CR/625/2022, applied to be discharged and acquitted.

October 24, 2022
Releasing Nnamdi Kanu will increase insecurity in South East – FG

The federal government of Nigeria has argued in court that releasing Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), will increase the spate of insecurity in the South Eastern part of the country.

The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Monday reserved judgment in the application filed by the federal government seeking to stay execution of the judgment that freed Kanu.

The three-member panel of justices led by Justice Haruna Tsammani reserved judgment on Monday after listening to arguments from counsel.

Arguing on behalf of the Federal Government, Mr David Kaswe told the court that the major ground of their application was on national security of the country.

He said the application for stay of execution was to allow for national security pending the hearing and determination of their appeal at the Supreme Court.

“If Kanu is released, he may not be available to face his charges in court because he had already jumped bail before. Releasing him will increase the state of insecurity in the South East,” Kaswe said while urging the appellate court to grant the FG’s application and not release Kanu.

Mr Mike Ozekhome, (SAN) counsel to Kanu, on his part, opposed the application for stay of execution on the grounds that it was a ploy to over rule the judgment of the appellate court.

“My lords should not allow them because it will cause chaos and anarchy. The release of Kanu will bring peace to the South East ,so there is no need to stay execution where there is no valid appeal,” Ozekhome said.

On the issue that Kanu had earlier jumped bail, Ozekhome argued that Kanu did not jump bail but escaped for his life when his house was evaded by the federal government.

Ozekhome also predicated his objection on the grounds that Kanu had a terminal illness and needed comprehensive medical attention outside of the Department of State Services (DSS) custody.

The senior lawyer prayed the court to dismiss the application for stay of execution saying that he would not ask for cost.

Earlier, the court had refused to grant the request of the Federal Government for adjournment but rather stood it down for counsel to peruse the necessary documents and argue their case.

Kaswe had complained that he was served with a counter affidavit by Ozekhome only on Friday.

The Appeal Court had on Oct. 13, voided the rendition of Kanu from Kenya to Nigeria and discharged him.

Recall that the appellate court voided the rendition of Kanu on account of breach of local and international laws.

The federal government not satisfied with this judgment said that it would explore every legal avenue to quash the judgment of the appellate court.

The government after appealing the appellate court’s judgment, filed a stay of execution on the grounds that releasing Kanu would not be in the interest of national security.

October 24, 2022
Kanu: Appeal Court’s order and Malami’s pontification – By Ehichioya Ezomon

Against the grain of widespread pleadings and expectation of concerned Nigerians, the Federal Government’s filed seven grounds of appeal to quash the October 13, 2022, Appeal Court’s judgment ordering the release of Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

Surely, the filing at the apex court is in keeping with the avowal of Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN), that the government would consider all available options on the judgment, and pursue the determination of pre-rendition issues.

The three Justices of the Appeal Court had “discharged and acquired” Kanu of the entire treasonable felony and terrorism charges preferred against him since 2015.

Though an Abuja Federal High Court had dismissed eight of the amended 15-count charge, the remaining seven counts before the Court of Appeal in Abuja were on the alleged abduction of Kanu from Kenya in June 2021.

The Appeal Court’s ruling says: “By engaging in utter unlawful and illegal acts and in breach of its own laws in the instant matter, the Federal Government did not come to equity in clean hands and must be called to order.

“With appalling disregard to local and international laws, the Federal Government has lost the right to put the appellant on trial for any offence. (Emphasis mine).

“Treaties and Protocols are meant to be obeyed. No government in the world is permitted to abduct anybody without following due process of extradition.

“Nigeria is not an exception or excused. Nigeria must obey her own law and that of international, so as to avoid anarchy.”

On the basis of the above, the Appeal Court ordered the immediate release of Kanu from his long incarceration at the facility of the Department of State Services in Abuja.

It’s doubtful if Malami had a certified true copy – unless he’s availed in advance of the ruling – before pouring cold water on the verdict, arguing the court didn’t acquit Kanu.

Vowing government’s continued charges against Kanu, Malami, via an official spokesman, Umar Jibril Gwandu, said: “For the avoidance of doubt and by the verdict of the Court, Kanu was only discharged and not acquitted.

“Consequently, the appropriate legal options before the authorities will be exploited and communicated accordingly to the public.

“The decision handed down by the court of appeal was on a single issue that borders on rendition. Let it be made clear to the general public that other issues that predate rendition on the basis of which Kanu jumped bail remain valid issues for judicial determination.

“The Federal Government will consider all available options open to us on the judgment on rendition while pursuing determination of pre-rendition issues.”

Some of the issues government pushes at the Supreme Court are:

*The Appeal Court erred by holding that, based on the rendition, the trial court has no jurisdiction to try Kanu * There’s no evidence led at the trial and appellate courts on the rendition

*The court misdirected itself by relying heavily on foreign decided cases on terrorism and human rights as against those of the criminal procedure in Nigeria

*The court erred by discharging Kanu on counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 15 on terrorism charges retained by the trial court for want of jurisdiction

*The court was silent and closed its eyes to the issues that predate Kanu’s rendition.

Correspondingly, the Federal Government prays the Supreme Court to:

*Set aside the Appeal Court judgment, and restore the charges at the trial court

*Stay execution of the ruling until the final determination of its appeal

*Refuse Kanu bail, as he’s a “flight risk person.”

The government’s hasty appeal against the Appeal Court judgment represents a classical case of “the more you look, the less you see” – indicating an apparent resolve to keep Kanu out of circulation throughout the duration of the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari.

Kanu’s five counts peaked at 15 after he jumped bail in 2017 and was arrested in June 2021 in Kenya, and flown back to Nigeria at the behest of the government.

The trial Federal High Court in Abuja subsequently struck out eight of the charges, leaving seven counts, which Kanu appealed to the Appeal Court that trashed the charges.

Ipso facto, there’re no longer charges against Kanu, and government could only maintain a cause of action by appealing the Appeal Court judgment or initiating fresh and unknown charges against Kanu, and that would leave the realm of prosecution to persecution of the detainee.

But amid criticisms against government’s plan to sustain Kanu’s trial, Malami reportedly floated a “political solution” to the impasse: the South-East governors should go and beg Buhari to unconditionally release Kanu, as if the governors had instigated Kanu’s alleged offences.

If not as a tool of official blackmail, why should it be the governors’ burden to surety Kanu who, with members of the IPOB, had routinely blamed the governors for alleged connivance to scuttle the agitation for Biafra?

Recall that following Malami’s prior remarks, former Anambra Sate Governor Chukwuemeka Ezeife expressed readiness to “kneel or prostrate” for Buhari to free Kanu.

“If President Buhari wants me to kneel down, I’ll kneel down. If he wants me to prostrate, I’ll prostrate just for Nnamdi Kanu to be released,” Dr Ezeife had pledged in an interview on Arise News morning show on October 17.

He said the release of Kanu “will address protests, agitation and the sitting-at-home in the South-East,” adding that Igbo elders would welcome negotiation “to ensure Kanu’s release and peace in the South-East.”

In any case, South-East leaders, including the governors, had met Buhari – in Abuja or in the South-East during his visits – and written series of letters on the Kanu matter, with the president repeatedly telling them that his hands were tied by the legal web entangling the detainee.

In other words, were the courts to set Kanu free, Buhari and the Federal Government would’ve no justification to incarcerate him to face further charges or trial.

Alas, the opportunity of good faith came on October 13 via the Appeal Court ruling, which discharged Kanu from the remaining seven of 15 charges against him since 2015! But the authorities have shunned that window!

The Appeal Court dress-down of the government – for violating both its own and international laws, to breach Kanu’s fundamental human rights – would sober any administration to avoid further pontification.

So, rather than continue Kanu’s detention and trial, President Buhari should seize the lucky chance the Appeal Court ruling offers to redeem his administration’s image.

To act otherwise strengthens the allegation that Kanu’s ordeal is part of an “unfinished business” to marginalise the South-East for its aborted “Republic of Biafra” in 1967, and the resultant Nigerian Civil War from 1967 to 1970. Government must dispel this alleged ill-motive against the people of the South-East!

*Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

October 24, 2022
Police raid suspected IPOB/ESN Camps, arrest 2 members in Ebonyi

The Tactical Team of the Police Command in Ebonyi has raided three camps of the outlawed IPOB/ESN operatives and arrested two suspected members of the gang.

SP Chris Anyanwu, Spokesperson of the command, said at a news conference in Abakaliki on Sunday that the camps were located in a thick forest close to Opeke River, in Omege village, Agba Community in Ishielu Local Government Area of Ebonyi.

Anyanwu said the team also recovered assorted arms and ammunition, military uniforms and many incriminating exhibits.

“The operation was spearheaded by the Command’s Tactical teams, assisted by the military and DSS in the state.

“It was prompted by quantum pieces of reliable evidence, professionally elicited from interrogation of Nnamdi Ngwuta, aka State Commander, number three and another operative of the outlawed group, Felix Ogudu, who were earlier arrested.

“While accessing the Camps, the combined teams were ambushed by the criminal elements with rains of sporadic shooting in their direction.

“Without hesitation, the allied team swiftly responded and engaged them in same manner and of course their superior fire power subdued the miscreants.

“They chanted morale-boasting war songs, dived into the Opeke River and swarm to different directions as they scampered for safety.

“However, a good number of them were neutralised while many escaped with bullet injuries.

“After dislodging the criminal elements and taking over the ground, the camp, which they christened “IGBO BU IGBO TRAINING SCHOOL CAMP”, was ransacked and destroyed.

“Equally, a wooden bridge under construction, intended to aid the miscreants in their coming and going, was dismantled,” he added.

The Spokesperson listed the recovered exhibits to include 11 bullet-proof jackets and eight sets of military camouflage uniforms.

“Two camp-gas cookers, 110 rounds of FNC live ammunition, 40 rounds of GPMG live ammunition, two PRO electronics scanners (EOD equipment), five empty canons and five single-barrel guns were also recovered among others.

The Police Command, therefore, implored the citizens of Ebonyi State to assist the command as always, with credible and reliable information that Would help to arrest the hoodlums.

He said that giving the imformation would help to rid the State of heinous crimes, especially during the fast approaching Christmas/New Year celebrations as well as the electioneering period.

October 23, 2022