Court Refuses to Vacate Order Proscribing IPOB
Acting Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Abdul Kafarati in a judgment delivered yesterday dismissed IPOB's application challenging the order.
The judge held that the memo written by the Attorney General of the Federation upon which the president gave the approval stands.
Kafarati, in addition awarded a cost of N500,000 (five hundred thousands naira) against the organisation.
The acting Chief Judge had on September 20, 2017, issued the proscription order following an ex parte application filed by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami.
Not satisfied with the decision, the organization through its counsel, Ifeanyi Ejiofor in an application urged the court to set aside the proscription order.
But delivering judgment yesterday, Kafarati held that the Federal Government was right in issuing the order based on the activities of IPOB prelude to the proscription.
The Judge held that IPOB being a foreign registered organisation can be prosecuted and punished in Nigeria, since the organization is in Nigeria and its members are Nigerians.
On Ejiofor's position that the process through which the order was obtain was defective, as according to him it was at variance with the provisions of the Terrorism Act, the acting CJ held that Section 21(a) gives the AGF powers to act on any issues relating to terrorism.
"It is my considered view that the memo written by Attorney-General of the Federation upon which the President gave his approval, stand", Kafarati held.
Also while stating that the applicant's right to fair hearing has not been violated, Kafarati said, Section 45(1) of the Constitution of the Fedral Republic of Nigeria provides that noting in sections 37, 38, 39, & 41 of the constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democracy.
Justice Kafarati, had on November 14, 2017 fixed January 17, 2018, for judgment on the suit challenging the Federal government proscription of the indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), after counsel in the matter concluded their submissions.
It would be recalled that he had on September 20, 2017, while delivering ruling in an exparte motion brought by the Federal government, issued an order proscribing the activities of IPOB and branding it a terrorist organization.
The federal government in the suit is represented by the Solicitor General of the Federation, Dayo Apata, while Ifeanyi Ejiofor is for IPOB.
EJiofor, in his submission, had urged the court to vacate it's order which proscribed IPOB as a terrorist organisation.
He premised his argument on the grounds that the process followed in obtaining the proscription order was defective.
EJiofor said that the Terrorist Act is explicit and specific on who can give approval for an organization to be proscribed, adding that President Muhammadu Buhari who the Act specifically empowered to approve the Proscription order, did not give his approval as required by the law.
According to him, a letter written by the Attorney General of the Federation to the President did not amount to approval nor the letter signed by the Chief of Staff to the President, Abba Kyari, conveying approval, as the duty of the President under the Act can not be delegated.
He submitted that "the order of the court did not comply with the processes of Section 40 of the terrorist Act which defined the office of the President and all actions that are to be taken by him under the Act. In the instant case, no approval was given by the President".
Ejiofor further argued that, IPOB has never engaged on any terrorist activities, adding that procession and rallies which the organization is engaged in were not terrorist acts.
Comments