TheNewsGuru

Tag: IPOB

  • Championing rule of law at home and criminality abroad – By Owei Lakemfa

    Championing rule of law at home and criminality abroad – By Owei Lakemfa

    Only a quarter of the eight million Palestinian people live in the Palestine; one million in Gaza, 750,000 in the occupied West Bank and 250,000 inside Israel. The rest, or over six million, are forced to live outside with at least three million of them classified as stateless persons with no legal rights. Yet these Palestinians in the diaspora are hunted like rabbits by the Israeli state.

    On September 28, 2022, two Palestinians were confronted in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia by four men working for Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency. They snatched one of them, a programmer from Gaza while the second Palestinian escaped. The victim was then taken to a chalet where he was tortured and interrogated directly by two Mossad agents via video call.

    The New Strait Times, Malaysia’s oldest newspaper published since 1845 reported that for 24 hours, the Palestinian was interrogated and beaten by his Malaysian captors whenever the answer he gave were not satisfactory to the Israeli agents.

    It reported that the Israelis wanted to know the depth of the victim’s knowledge of computer application development, what he knew about the Palestinian group, Hamas’ expertise in developing software and information on its military arm, the Al-Qassam Brigade.

    Luckily for the victim, his colleague who escaped, alerted the Malaysian police which was able to trace the victim and free him. He had sustained injuries to his body, head and legs. Both Palestinians left the country, eleven Malaysians were charged with the kidnap while the Israelis remain free in their country to track down more Palestinians abroad for abduction or even murder. Israel at home, claims to be a democracy based on the rule of law, but believes it is licensed abroad to carry out brigandage and murder defenceless people who are given no chance to defend themselves.

    Nnamdi Kanu is the leader of the separatist Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB. He was on bail in September 2017 when the military invaded his home in Afara-Ukwu, near Umuahia, Abia State. He escaped the bloody invasion and fled the country. On June 19, 2021 in Nairobi, Kenya, he drove himself to the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport named after the father of the then Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta.

    His mission was to receive an IPOB leader. In the underground car park, he was abducted, and then, terrorised for eight days before his rendition to Abuja on Sunday, June 27. He was travelling on his British passport. So it was a case of a vising foreign national abducted by a third country. His lawyer in Nigeria, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, claimed Kanu was “mercilessly beaten and tortured” in a private residence before his extradition.

    It was a clear case of a government sworn to uphold the rule of law, constitutionality and fundamental human rights, caught abroad violently violating all these.

    But the Nigerian courts would have none of these. The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja, on Thursday October 13, 2022 quashed the terrorism charges against Kanu, discharged and acquitted him because it was satisfied that the government flagrantly violated Nigerian, African and international laws in abducting him.

    The appellate court held that the proceedings against Kanu amounted to “an abuse of criminal prosecution in general”. It declared that: “The court will never shy away from calling the Executive to order when it tilts towards Executive recklessness”.

    In the criminality called extraordinary rendition, the abductors sometimes mix up faces and people. This was the case of Khaled El-Masri, a German who was seized by Macedonian agents on December 31, 2003 and held in solitary confinement for 23 days on suspicion of being a member of Al-Qaida.

    The Macedonians transferred him to the American Central Intelligence Agency, CIA, who flew him to Kabul, Afghanistan where he was detained and interrogated. Nobody was ready to listen to his explanations or cross check his claims. When after four months the Americans discovered their error, rather than apologise and return him home, they flew him back to Europe and abandoned him on a roadside in Albania.

    There was also the case of Syrian-born Canadian, Maher Arar, who was detained at the JFK Airport, New York while returning from vacation. He was first taken to a detention centre in Brookyln, then flown to Jordan before being finally dumped in a prison in Syria.

    In the last two decades, the Americans have illegally abducted over 150 persons across the world and dumped them in its detention centres in places like Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Diego Garcia, Guantánamo and Afghanistan – before the Americans were forced to evacuate that country.

    A former CIA agent, Robert Baer, said of the shadowy American programme: “If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear — never to see them again — you send them to Egypt.”

    Ambassador Alex Saab, a Colombian-born Venezuelan diplomat was flying to Iran to buy food and medicines for his country. On June 12, 2020, his aircraft refuelled in Cape Verde where he was abducted and detained. The regional Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS, court ruled his detention illegal and ordered Cape Verde to pay him $200,000 in compensation. But rather than free him, he was delivered to the Americans who bundled him to their country where he sits in jail. The Americans accuse him of money laundry for violating unilateral United States sanctions against Venezuela and Iran.

    When the Americans tried a similar action against Huawei Executive Meng Wanzhou in December 2018 by getting Canada to detain her preparatory to bundling her to America, the Chinese retaliated by seizing two Canadians, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig and charged them with espionage. Wanzhou had been accused of having business dealings with Iran in violation of unilateral American sanctions. A deal had to be reached exchanging her for the Canadians.

    France is another player in the game. In 1994, Venezuelan internationalist, Ilich Ramirez Sanchez better known as Carlos the Jackal was visiting Sudan when French agents abducted him. Carlos who had led campaigns for Palestinian freedom, has since remained in jail having received three life sentences.

    France has a long history of such abductions. In October 1956 it hijacked an aircraft in which Moroccan-born Algerian freedom fighter, Ahmed Ben Bella was travelling. He was set free on July 5, 1962 and went on to become President of a free Algeria.

    Abdullah Ocalan, 73, sits in a Turkish prison for championing the minority rights of Kurds in Turkey. He was abducted in Nairobi, Kenya by a Turkish secret agent in February 1999.

    Countries cannot claim to operate the rule of law at home while committing criminality abroad.

  • Supreme Court to determine Nnamdi Kanu’s fate- FG

    Supreme Court to determine Nnamdi Kanu’s fate- FG

    In a bid to continuously detain the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu. the Federal Government has filed seven grounds of appeal against the October 13 Court of Appeal judgment which discharged him.

    It asked the Supreme Court to set aside the judgment and restore the charge against the respondent to be tried at the trial court.

    The government, in a motion on notice in support of the appeal, is also seeking a stay of execution of the judgment of the court presided over by Justice Jummai Sankey, pending the hearing and final determination of its appeal, noting that the IPOB leader posed a flight risk.

    The notice of appeal dated October 18 was signed by the Director, Public Prosecution of the Federation, Mohammed Abubakar, Assistant Chief State Counsel, D. Kaswe and A. Aluko and Senior State Counsel, G. Nweze, Department of Public Prosecution, Federal Ministry of Justice.

    The appellant averred that the appellate court erred in law when it held that the trial court had no jurisdiction to try Kanu because of “the extraordinary rendition of the respondent.”

    It stated, “There was no evidence led by the respondent before the court of the first instance and indeed before the court below to show how he was allegedly abducted and rendered to Nigeria as required by Section 139 of the Evidence Act, 2011 since he alleged that he was abducted without following due process of law.”

    The appeal court misdirected itself when it relied heavily on the Organisation of African Unions Conventions on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism, the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights and cases decided from foreign jurisdictions as against the substantive law covering the criminal procedure in Nigeria

    The appellant also contended that the court below erred when it held that the executive arm must not be allowed to benefit from the abduction of the respondent “when in fact and by its judgment, the respondent was allowed to benefit from his illegality of disobeying the orders of the court when he jumped bail and was rewarded with a discharge from the charges pending against him at the trial court thereby occasioning a miscarriage of justice against the state and the victims of the crimes perpetrated by the respondent.”

    The government claimed that the appeal court was wrong by saying that how Kanu was brought back to the country can vitiate and indeed weaken the criminal charges of treason, treasonable felony and terrorism brought against him.

    It added that the lower court made that decision without taking into account the fact that the nature of the “entry’’ of the respondent is not relevant in the determination of the charges against him.

    The appellant further stated that the appeal court justices failed to be bound by established judicial precedent on the mode of “entry” of a defendant charged with the commission of an offence established by the Supreme Court.

    The appeal court, the FG noted, misdirected itself when it relied heavily on the Organisation of African Unions Conventions on the Prevention and Combating of Terrorism, the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights and cases decided from foreign jurisdictions as against the substantive law covering the criminal procedure in Nigeria.

    “The court below overlooked the submissions of the appellant with regards to the ACJA, 2015 which takes its taproot from the grundnorm Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) to the effect that it is the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 that governs the trial of every Nigerian charged with the commission of a crime, this failure occasioned the miscarriage of justice,’’ the appeal notice read.

    The FG further argued that the court below erred in law when it discharged the respondent of the offences mentioned in counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 15 bordering on terrorism offences contained in the amended charge dated January 14, 2022, and retained by the trial court for want of jurisdiction.

    The appeal observed that the appellate court was completely silent and closed its eyes to the obvious fact of the issues which predate the rendition of the respondent because he was standing trial for conspiracy, and treasonable felony terrorism before his escape.

    “If the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal had taken into consideration the act of illegality of the respondent in jumping bail and the corresponding duty of the appellant to ensure his presence in court, the decision of the court would have been different,’’ the appeal read.

    In an affidavit, Loveme Odubo of the Department of Public Prosecution, Federal Ministry of Justice, stated that Kanu has a history of jumping bail and may be difficult to secure if the appeal was not granted.

    The affidavit read, “That the respondent is a flight risk person given his previous antecedent of jumping bail while standing trial.

    “The respondent is a dual citizen of both Nigeria and Britain which will make it easy for him to move out of Nigeria and escape justice. That the respondent’s presence will be difficult to secure should the judgment of the court below is not overturned and set aside by the Supreme Court.

    “There is a need to stay the execution of the judgment of this honourable court to avoid a situation where the judgment of the Supreme Court will be overreached and rendered nugatory.’’

    Obey Court of Appeal ruling- Senate S’East Caucus
    Meanwhile, the South East Caucus in the Senate has intervened in the case of the Federal Government against Kanu, urging that the ruling by the Court of Appeal be obeyed.

    In a statement jointly signed by 14 South-East Senators on Thursday, they advised the government against appealing the ruling at the Supreme Court but rather asked the Presidency to utilise the opportunity presented by the Appeal Court ruling and consider a political solution to solve the lingering problem in the interest of the country’s unity and peaceful coexistence of Nigerians.

    The statement said, “This is the time to show magnanimity and statesmanship. The Appeal Court has provided the leeway for the authorities to walk the talk as ones desirous of preserving Nigeria’s unity and respect for her diversity.

    “Accordingly, we as a Caucus and stakeholders in the Nigeria project, appeal to Mr President, to remember the promise he made to a delegation of elders of Igboland sometime ago and release Nnamdi Kanu.”

  • 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.

  • South East traditional rulers, bishops call for Nnamdi Kanu’s release

    South East traditional rulers, bishops call for Nnamdi Kanu’s release

    The South East Council of Traditional Rulers and Representatives of Igbo Archbishops and Bishops have joined the call on the Federal Government to release Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).

    They made the call in a statement issued in Awka on Tuesday signed by Igwe Nnaemeka Achebe, Chairman, Anambra Traditional Rulers Council, and Most Rev. Dr. Chibuzo Opoko, Methodist Archbishop of Umuahia.

    Others that signed the statement are Igwe Lawrence Agubuzu, Chairman, Enugu Traditional Rulers Council, and Most Rev. Dr. Valerian Okeke, Catholic Archbishop of Onitsha.

    The joint body said it welcomed the judgment of an Appeal Court which discharged Nnamdi and described it as an “unprecedented opportunity to overcome the challenge of trust that has obstructed the path to peace”.

    The joint body said it had been consistent in calling on all stakeholders for peacebuilding and resolution of security challenges in the South East based on justice, equity, fairness, and love.

    “We have also supported the call for the unconditional release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu by the Federal Government to douse the current tensions across the Southeast and create an atmosphere for collaboration towards a constructive resolution of issues.

    “The judgment of the Appellate Court presents a timely and unprecedented opportunity to overcome the challenge of trust that has obstructed the path to peace; and opens the window to winning the hearts and minds of the people.

    “We, therefore, unequivocally support the call for the immediate release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in line with the unanimous judgement of the Court that his extradition and subsequent trial was illegal,” he said.

    The traditional rulers and bishops said they had undertaken extensive consultations with all stakeholders to broker a permanent, regionally coordinated restoration of the South-East.

    It said the march towards peace and the restoration of normalcy in the society and economy required the collective action of all people.

    According to them, we are confident that all Nigerians will rise to the summons of history and act with courage, conviction and integrity.

    Other stakeholders including Ohaneze Ndigbo and the elder statesman in Delta, Chief Edwin Clarke had earlier appealed to the Federal Government to release Kanu as the court directed in the interest of peace.

  • Lawyers to IPOB’s leader set to storm DSS Headquarters

    Lawyers to IPOB’s leader set to storm DSS Headquarters

    Ifeanyi Ejiofor, Counsel for the leader of Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, has revealed that the legal team would be formally approaching the Department of State Services, DSS, headquarters on Monday, barely 72 hours after being set free by the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal.

    While citing legal authorities, he said the freedom of Nnamdi Kanu, which was his fundamental and constitutionally guaranteed right, could not be stayed.

    Should the government and its security agencies refuse to release Kanu, he said far-reaching extant legal remedies, including reporting Nigeria to international agencies, would be activated to ensure immediate compliance with the court order.

    TheNewsGuru.com reports that the Court of Appeal (Abuja Division) had on Thursday freed Kanu of the terrorism and treasonable felony charges preferred against him by the Federal Government.

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

    The Appellate Court in the unanimous judgement delivered by Justice Oludotun Adefope-Okojie 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 rendition of Kanu to Nigeria, thereby making the terrorism charges against him incompetent and unlawful.

    But Ejiofor, who expressed optimism that Kanu would be out of prison today (Monday), advised the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), to do the needful by obeying the court order.

    He said, “It has been my position that the Federal Government has a right to appeal to the Supreme Court, which is a constitutionally guaranteed right. But the only impediment to the exercise of that right is that the Federal Government must first of all comply with the Order of the Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal which discharged Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, and prohibited further indictment or commencing any fresh criminal charge against him.

    “It is a settled law, as has been held by the Supreme Court in a plethora of cases, including the apex court’s decision in the case of Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu Vs Lagos State Government, that an appellant will not be in contempt of an order of a lower court, and approach the Supreme Court in search of equitable remedies to stay the execution. It is more so when by the effect of the Judgement of the Court Appeal under reference emphatically set aside the order of the lower court and the frivolous charge which had hitherto legitimised his detention from June 29 2022, they are now terminated and became extinct on October 13 2022.

    “Furthermore, the freedom of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu which is his fundamental and constitutionally guaranteed right cannot be stayed.

    “Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is yet to be released, though we will be formally approaching the State Security Service Headquarters on Monday with the enrolled order of the court, and judgement of the Court of Appeal which will be available on Monday, for immediate compliance. We expect to have Mazi Nnamdi Kanu released to us today, being October 17 2022.

    “The Federal Government is yet to file any appeal against the judgement of the Court of Appeal, as at today. But as I had earlier stated, the Federal Government must first of all obey the order of the Court of Appeal and release Mazi Nnamdi Kanu who has been discharged by the Court of Appeal, before challenging the judgement before the Supreme Court.

    “It is our position that in the unlikely event that the Federal Government of Nigeria fails to obey the order of the Court of Appeal discharging Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, we will activate far-reaching extant legal remedies to ensure immediate compliance, which remedy may not be limited to resorting to domestic legal remedy, but would be extended to reporting the Federal Government of Nigeria heinous conduct before the relevant international agencies, foreign Institutions and governments. Other legal remedies available to us will not be disclosed here.

    “President Muhammadu Buhari had said on various occasions that he would not interfere with the judicial process and that it is the court that would set Mazi Nnamdi Kanu free. The Court of Appeal, the penultimate court, has set Mazi Nnamdi Kanu free, it is now time for President Muhammadu Buhari to keep to his word and ensure that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is released without any further ado.”

    While setting Kanu free, the Appellate Court agreed with counsel for the IPOB leader, Dr. Mike Ozekhome, SAN, that Kanu was illegally abducted and extra-ordinary renditioned from Kenya to Nigeria, against both, International and local laws.

    “By the illegal abduction and extraordinary rendition of the appellant, there was a clear violation by the respondent to International treaties, conventions, as well as the African Charter on Human and Peoples Right,” the court held.

    The Appellate Court said that the Federal Government, having flagrantly breached the fundamental rights of Kanu, lost the legal right to put him on trial, adding also that laws were meant to be obeyed and that the Federal Government had no reason to have taken laws into her own hands in the illegal and unlawful way the matter of Kanu was handled.

    The failure of Nigeria to follow due process by way of extradition process as prescribed by law, it said, was fatal to the charges against Kanu and further held that the failure of the Federal Government to disclose where and when the alleged offences brought against Kanu were committed was also fatal to the terrorism charges and made them liable to dismissal.

    “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 trial for any offence.

    “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,” the Court held.

    The panel also held that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to handle the charges against Kanu, as he was not properly arraigned before the court.

    The panel, presided over by Justice Jummai Hanatu, also held that the offences Kanu was alleged to have committed happened in Kenya and not in Nigeria.

    Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja had said in her judgement that counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 15 showed some allegations, which the IPOB leader had to answer.

    But Kanu, through his team of lawyers led by Mike Ozekhome, SAN, filed an appeal marked CA/ABJ/CR/625/2022, praying the court to quash the remaining seven counts for being devoid of merit.

  • FG looking for options to continue to incarcerate Kanu – PDP

    FG looking for options to continue to incarcerate Kanu – PDP

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Abia state has alleged that the federal government was looking for other options to continue to incarcerate IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu.

    This was made known in a statement on Saturday afternoon signed by its Vice Chairman/Acting State Publicity Secretary, Elder Abraham Amah. The party carpeted the Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, over his comments on the discharge of Kanu, calling on the federal government to obey the ruling of the Court of Appeal, Abuja that discharged the 15-count charge preferred against Nnamdi Kanu.

    PDP while calling on the federal government to consider it a matter of urgent national importance to release Mazi Nnamdi Nnamdi Kanu as the court has discharged and acquitted “This news is cheering and worth celebrating, coming at a time when Nigeria is in dire need of healing, to necessarily unite the country and harness the benefits of our diversity. The court ruling has also reinforced our belief that the judiciary is all said, the hope of the common man.

    “Unfortunately, the reports we received regarding the comments of the Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami and the National Security Council that the Appeal Court merely discharged Mazi Nnamdi Kanu but did not acquit him and that the federal government is looking for other options to continue to incarcerate him is not welcome.

    “Having failed in his promise to use a political option to resolve the matter, the insistence by the federal government to continue to keep him even after a court has discharged and acquitted him, amounts to double-speak and does not show good faith in our democracy and the continuous existence of our country as one indivisible unit. We call on the federal government to consider it a matter of urgent national importance and release Mazi Nnamdi Nnamdi Kanu.

  • Conversation Nigeriana (8) – By Hope O’Rukevbe Eghagha

    Conversation Nigeriana (8) – By Hope O’Rukevbe Eghagha

    Obukohwo: All the victims, innocent travellers between Abuja and Kaduna, kidnapped by the vagabond train terrorists have been set free at last!

    Dupe: Praise the Lord!

    Bankole: Released or set free after payment of ransoms?

    Dupe: Whatever! I just praise God that they have been reunited with their families! No one is sure that ransom was paid!

    Obukohwo: Sadly, three days after they were set free, one of the victims was killed by another set of bandits while on his way home to Kebbi! To add insult to injury, one of his relations who had travelled to rejoice with him was kidnapped!

    Dupe: Wickedness in high places. Was this a coincidence or it was arranged by the same morons who kidnapped him before?

    Obukohwo: No one knows the truth. What is happening in Nigeria is pregnant and nursing a baby at the same time. Now they will ask for a ransom!

    Bulama: By paying ransoms to criminals, this government has made abductions a profitable venture. Some security officials have joined in the kidnapping business. For example, it was reported that the DSS once arrested an unnamed soldier for hiring guns to kidnappers for N300,000! We cannot correctly estimate how much has been paid to kidnappers by governments and private citizens! It must be in billions!

    Obukohwo: That’s why they can purchase arms and ammunition to threaten the seat of government and the governor of Kaduna State!

    Bulama: I won’t lose any sleep if the diminutive fellow of Kaduna State and his wild son are abducted by the terrorists whom they created. Their utterances are usually filthy and arrogant, unbecoming of people of stature!

    Obukohwo: Stature? What stature? Please spare me…Fela called such people VIPs!

    Dupe: It’s not enough to wish them evil please. To be kidnapped is a nightmarish experience. I’m still seeing a clinical psychologist two years after my kidnap!

    Obukohwo: Serious?

    Dupe: Yes oo! That’s subject for another day!

    Emeka: Paying ransoms is bad enough. But the word is out that they federal government did a swap with the terrorists!

    Obukohwo: What do you mean?

    Emeka: So, there were some terrorists arrested in the past who were in different jails, both in Abuja and Lagos. To secure the release of the last twenty-three abductees, the government released all the terrorists who had been detained for criminal activities!

    Bulama: Nooooo!

    Emeka: Yeeees! We are in trouble in this country. A civil rights advocacy organisation HURIWA issued a press release in which they asserted that ‘the latest antics of the regime of President Buhari in the reported release of over 100 Boko Haram terrorists from the Kirikiri Prison shows the total absence of transparency and accountability in the fight on terror’.

    Dupe: We knew when Sheikh Gumi’s aide Tukur Mamu was negotiating with the terrorists and securing the release of abductees in batches.

    Bankole: Yes, indeed, Gumi himself started the negotiations and started uttering rubbish words from his mouth which showed sympathy for the terrorists. Indeed, in February 2021 after visiting some bandits in Gummi and Shinkafi Local Government areas in Zamfara State, Gumi called on the government to negotiate with terrorists to ‘bring an end to banditry and kidnappings in the country! Later he got angry and said he would not negotiate with the terrorists anymore! Some people do not understand the concept of the modern State. then his aide Mamu took over. Mamu was arrested in Egypt after a request by DSS, brought back to Nigeria and detained indefinitely. Apparently, he was doing nefarious business with the bandits. The official statement is that he must ‘answer critical questions on ongoing investigations relating to some security matters in parts of the country’.

    Emeka: Can you imagine a citizen going into the forests to meet with criminals and then coming back to urge the government to negotiate with thieves!

    Obukohwo: The thought of it galls me!

    Bankole: If it had been an Igbo man that went to negotiate with IPOB the world would have crashed on him! See the speed with which he outlawed IPOB and went after Sunday Igboho and Nnamdi Kanu. But his herder brothers roam the country with AK47s attached to their body!

    Obukohwo: it is sad that Buhari who campaigned on a national platform and got a broad mandate in 2015 is leaving office as a clannish president. What an antithesis!

    Bulama: Our rulers do not care about legacies!

    Bankole: They have no sense of history. Perhaps in their subconscious minds the country will not endure and so there is no need to create national legacies! So, this accounts for the absence of national heroes. We do not have them anymore. Murtala Mohammed tried. Even IBB created a national image for himself.

    Bulama: Yes, the era of heroes is over; they civil war created heroes both on the Nigerian and Biafran sides.

    Emeka: True, when Wole Soyinka went to the Southeast in 1967 to hold a meeting with Biafran leader Emeka Ojukwu to try dissuading him from the war, General Gowon arrested him upon his return and kept the man in detention, solitary confinement, for two years and some months. Soyinka became an instant world celebrity. Prisoner of Conscience he was called, and his pictures were all over the world.

    Bankole: Even Ojukwu was a hero too. Heroic villainy. But if he had fought Nigeria to a standstill the way little Ukraine has contained the almighty Russia, he would have been a hero forever!

    Obukohwo: But at the end of the war, Gowon said there was no victor, no vanquished!

    Emeka: On paper yes! The Igbo were vanquished. They were punished and are still being punished decades after the war. How much were they given in exchange for their monies? Some powerbrokers keep using the war to argue against an Igbo President!

    Bulama: There are too many unsettled issues about Nigeria!

    Dupe: We need to redefine Nigeria, interrogate it, and agree on how we want to live together. The presidency must be rotated between north and south for example.

    Emeka: We must restructure the country and make the central government less powerful. No president should sit in Abuja and call the shots in my local government area in the Niger Delta; no federal government should try to control water resources because it wants to make the water in my village available to herders from all over Africa.

    Bulama: No one will try that fa! But let us discuss the bandits and unknown gunmen operating freely and brutally in the southeast. Who are those scoundrels? What do they want? Why are they killing their kith and kin like fowl?

    Emeka: My brother, it is a serious matter. There is breakdown of law and order in Anambra and Imo States. We no longer hold elaborate burial ceremonies without settling the gunmen!

    Bankole: You mean they are not anonymous?

    Emeka: I don’t know what to say anymore. Sometimes, people in the villages will advise you to part with some money before you organise a ceremony. I don’t know where the money goes. But most of the perpetrators are local boys. Why they turn on their own, their successful brothers and sisters who have no dealings with government baffles me.

    Bulama: It is the same in the north. The bandits kill people of all faiths. That is the reason we keep stressing that bandits are criminals. There is nothing Islamic about Boko Haram or ISWAP. They are bloody criminals using Islam as a front.

    Bankole: The federal government does not have the will to deal ruthlessly with the criminals for reasons I don’t know. Buhari has been a big disappointment to all, including his faithful APC supporters though they will not say this in public.

    Dupe: It is no secret. Each time the Tinubu people campaign and make promises to improve security, they indirectly indict Buhari and his people in government.

    Emeka: The country must go back to factory reset!

  • Uzodimma never faulted Appeal Court judgment on Kanu – Imo govt.

    Uzodimma never faulted Appeal Court judgment on Kanu – Imo govt.

    The Imo Government has refuted a social media report that Gov. Hope Uzodimma faulted the Appeal Court judgment which acquitted detained leader of the proscribed Indigenious People of Biafra (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu.

    The state’s Commissioner for Information and Strategy, Mr Declan Emelumba made the refuttal in a statement he signed in Owerri on Friday.

    Newsmen reports that the Appellate Court, on Thursday, quashed the allegations for which Kanu was arrested and detained as well as discharged and acquitted him.

    Emelumba described the report as “fake, embarrassing and infantile”.

    He said that the report was the handiwork of mischief makers, enemies of government and disgruntled members of the opposition aimed at dragging the governor’s image to the mud.

    He added that the governor, as a law abiding citizen, believed in the rule of law and could not have queried the judgment as insinuated by the fake news.

    ” After the series of successes recorded by Uzodimma in governance and other national assignments, disgruntled opposition and purveyors of misleading information have been trying to whittle down his popularity.

    ” Those familiar with the character of the state governor will affirm that he has never criticised the judiciary even when judgments did not go his way in personal matters.

    ” It is the height of mischief and perjury for anyone in the state to attribute such a comment to Uzodimma,” he said.

    He, however, advised managers of public information to be circumspect in the discharge of their duties.
    He further advised Nigerians to ignore the fake news as neither the governor nor any of his aides had reacted to the Appeal Court judgment on Kanu.

    ” The fake news did not attempt to answer the fundamental questions of 5Ws and H,which are who, what, when, where, why and how, concerning any news story. This renders it fake and unprofessional,” the commissioner said.

  • Nnamdi Kanu’s community erupts in jubilation over Court’s judgment

    Nnamdi Kanu’s community erupts in jubilation over Court’s judgment

    The sleeping Eziama Afara-Ukwu Community in Umuahia, the home of Nnamdi Kanu, erupted in jubilation on Thursday, following the news of his acquittal by an Abuja Court of Appeal.

    Kanu, the Leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), had been standing trial for alleged treasonable felony and other charges, since October 2015.

    He was granted bail in April 2017 after 18 months in detention. He, thereafter, fled the country after soldiers attacked his Umuahia residence during a military operation, code-named “Operation Python Dance”, targetted at the proscribed IPOB.

    He was, however, re-arrested in June 2021 in Kenya and extradited to the country to resume his trial. The IPOB leader was remanded in the custody of the Department of State Services until the Court discharged and acquitted him.

    Youths, men, women and children of his community trooped out to Kanu’s family house in ecstasy, when news about his acquittal broke out.

    The shouts of “Owo-woo”, a common refrain in celebrating and rejoicing over a pleasant and remarkable development in Igboland, rented the atmosphere.

    Women brought out white powder, which they shared to all and sundry that converged within the precints of his father’s palace.

    The palace which had hitherto looked desolate, especially after the death of Kanu’s parents in 2021, spontaneously became electrified in joyful celebration.

    Also, the atmosphere in the community, which had also been in quiet and somber mood, suddenly became charged.

    The visibly ecstatic young men later rolled out local drums and escalated the celebration round the village.

    The crowd danced excitedly, chanting songs of freedom and thanksgiving to God.

    The Deputy Governorship Candidate of APGA in Abia, Chief Obinna Ichita, also drove into the village in the midst of the jubilation.

    He spoke with newsmen, who were in the community to monitor the mood of the people.

    He expressed joy over the Court’s decision, saying that the judgment further proved the judiciary “as the last hope of the common man.

    “I have always recommended political solution in resolving Kanu’s case. You can see the wild jubilation going on,” he said, adding that the development would activate the restoration of enduring peace and security in the South-East.

    Ichita, who represents Aba North and South State Constituency in the House of Assembly, said he believed that Kanu’s incarceration contributed to the security breaches in the South-East.

    “It is my opinion that Kanu is part of the solution and not the problem,” he said.

    According to him, Kanu can offer actionable ideas toward solving the problem of inequality, injustice and marginalisation of some sections of the country.

    “This is the time for us as a country to further interrogate those issues that he stood for so that we can begin to enthrone fairness, equity and justice,” the lawmaker said.

    Also, the Vice President-General (PG) and immediate past PG of the community, Chief Benjamin Ohaeri and Chief Ikechukwu Ndubueze, captured the mood of the community in separate interviews with newsmen.

    They said that God had answered their prayers, adding that the people’s joy knew no bounds. They said that the community had been apprehensive and depressed since Kanu was incarcerated. They said that they had been acquitted by the Court’s judgment, adding that they were “convinced that Kanu’s hands are clean”.

    A cleric, Israel Okechukwu, said that joy and happiness took flight from the communty since Kanu’s ordeal began.

    “He is our illustrious son and Prince of Afara-Ukwu,” he said, adding that his release would bring lasting peace in the entire Igboland.

    All the speakers admonished the youths to be peaceful and cautious in their celebration and shun violence and acrimony.

  • We are not done with IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu yet – FG

    We are not done with IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu yet – FG

    The Federal Government has said it is not done with the trial of the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu yet.

    The Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, made this known in a statement issued by Dr Umar Gwandu, Special Assistant on Media and Public Relations Ministry of Justice.

    He stated that the federal government was considering appropriate legal options concerning the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

    Malami 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 issues that borders on rendition.

    “Let it be made clear to the  general public that other issues that predates rendition on the basis of which Kanu jumped bail remain valid issues for judicial determination”.

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

    The court on Thursday in Abuja quashed the terrorism charge brought against Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of IPOB.

    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 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 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 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 rearraigned.

    “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 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 regards to criminal charge, the trial court does not have “global jurisdiction”.

    More so, “Section 195 and 196 of Administrattion of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), state that a charge must have 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.

    Kanu specifically prayed the appellate court to 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.

    Kanu equally urged the appellate court to order his release on bail, pending the determination of his appeal.

    Though the appeal was initially fixed for October 11, however, following an application the embattled IPOB leader filed for abridgement of time, the appellate court brought the matter forward for hearing.