We the worldwide family of the
Indigenous People of Biafra wish to draw the attention of the civilised to what
transpired at Justice Binta Nyako’s court in Abuja on Thursday 22 March 2018 at
the commencement of the trial of 4 innocent Biafrans. The world must know that
they are standing trial for offences not known to any law in Nigeria. A trial
of this magnitude on the opening day usually witness the key evidence or
testimony from the prosecution or their witness but what played out in court
was anything but. This trial, observed on social media by millions of people
all over the world, waited anxiously for the ‘smoking gun’ or key
government evidence to be tendered in court or alluded to in oral
evidence given by the prosecution witness to no avail. Nothing happened
It
turned out that the key evidence the government is relying upon to gain a
conviction of conspiracy to commit treasonable felony is a non operational and
disused AM Shortwave transmitter legally purchased from Nigerian Customs at an
auction in Apapa Lagos. We have taken the precaution of attaching the full
transcript of the witness testimony under oath to buttress this point.
The
four IPOB family members standing trial have been in illegal detention for
nearly nearly three years, with proper trial only commencing now on March 22,
2018. Thankfully and for the first time in public, the key witness for the
Federal Government of Nigeria admitted in court that being a member of IPOB was
not a crime when the defendants were arrested.
The Witness, simply identified as AB to hide his true identity, as directed by
the presiding judge, is a DSS officer that claimed that he “investigated”
Bright Chimezie, one of the defendants, after he was arrested by the DSS at
Uyo, Akwa Ibom State. Led in evidence by prosecution counsel, the witness also
testified that Mr Chimezie was an IPOB ‘Welfare Officer in charge of giving
money donated by IPOB members to assist widows IPOB members killed by security
agents during their demonstrations on self determination’.
The
Witness further testified that Mr Chimezie was the one who took delivery of the
Container bearing the transmitter the government had alleged IPOB intended to
use to broadcast its ‘message of self determination in Nigeria’.
On cross examination by Chukwudi Igwe, defense Counsel to Bright Chimezie, the
Witness contradicted himself by testifying that ‘IPOB was not an illegal group
and belonging to it was not illegal when Chimezie was arrested’.
It
will be recalled that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of IPOB who has been missing
since the Nigeria army attacked his home, was also arrested for the same
transmitter-related ‘offense of self determination or preparations to secede’
as stated on the various Charge Sheets’.
Upon
further cross examination, the DSS witness also admitted that he did not travel
to Uyo to find out why Mr Chimezie was arrested and that he did not travel to
the Lagos Wharf to investigate whether the ‘Container was cleared or smuggled’.
Informed by counsel that the Container was not smuggled but properly cleared,
the Witness answered that he did not know and that he was just stating what he
was told by ‘the team of DSS investigators’.
Further,
the Witness admitted that he did not see any Bill of Lading showing that it was
IPOB that imported the Container at issue. Asked to explain what he really did
as an ‘investigator’ when he didn’t visit the scenes of the alleged offense,
the DSS officer stated that the only thing he did was to take the Written
Statement of Bright Chimezie and endorsed it.
On
further cross examination by other defense counsels, the Witness was asked to
explain whether it is illegal for a group to cater for the welfare of widows of
its members, the Witness responded that it’s not illegal. Asked to explain why
DSS kept Chimezie in detention this long when he was not the one that imported
the Container, and being member of IPOB was not illegal, the Witness could not
offer any explanation, whereupon the defense counsel requested the court to
note his non-response.
Meanwhile,
it has emerged that defense counsels have filed a Notice of Preliminary
Objection challenging jurisdiction and praying the court to strike the charge
of ‘Treasonable Felony’ against the defendants on the grounds that ‘agitating
for self-determination or secession is not a crime known to any Nigerian Law’.
In the Motion, counsels argued that ‘the allegation that defendants were making
preparations to secede is not one of the FOUR offenses defined as a treasonable
felony under Section 41 of the Criminal Code’. The Section provides as follows:
“Any
person who forms an intention to effect any of the following purposes, that is
to say-
(a)
to remove during his term of office otherwise than by constitutional means the
President as Head of State of the Federation and Commander-in-Chief of the
armed forces thereof; or
(b)
to likewise remove during his term of office the Governor of a State; or
(c)
to levy war against Nigeria in order by force or constraint to compel the
President to change his measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or
constraint upon, or in order to intimidate or overawe any House of the National
Assembly or any other Legislature or legislative authority; or
(d)
to instigate any foreigner to make any armed invasion of Nigeria or of any of
the territories thereof; and manifests such intention by an overt act, is
guilty of a felony and is liable to imprisonment for life”.
On
the basis of the above provisions, defense counsels have contended in their
Motion that ‘preparations to secede’ is not an ‘offense captured under any of
the four offenses named at Section 41 of the Criminal Code that should sustain
the Charge of conspiracy to secede for which the defendants were charged under
Section 516 of the Criminal Code’.
It
will be recalled that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was also charged for the same offense
that defense counsels have now challenged as not being an offense in Nigeria.
In
view of this new and surprising development, the court adjourned the trial to May 1, 2018;
and scheduled a hearing on the Motion challenging its jurisdiction as well as
the applications for bail on March
28, 2018.
If
according to the government witness, IPOB was not an illegal group when
Nnamdi Kanu was arrested in October 2015, why then is the trial going
ahead? Or is it because of the irrational fear of the success that Biafra
will become or the morbid Hausa Fulani hatred for IPOB and Nnamdi Kanu. Justice
Binta Nyako must as a matter of public decency dismiss the frivolous charges,
acquit the defendants and apologise to IPOB on behalf of the Nigerian
judiciary.
COMRADE
EMMA POWERFUL MEDIA AND PUBLICITY SECRETARY FOR IPOB
Comments
Post a Comment