Biafra: I am Being Persecuted, Kanu Cries Out

Biafra: I am Being Persecuted, Kanu Cries Out

Detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has described himself as a victim of travesty of justice and gross human rights violation following his continued detention by the Federal Government.

 Kanu who expressed his readiness to stand trial today said all he was asking for was a fair trial and not persecution.

In a statement by one of his counsel, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, the Biafra agitator who has filed a suit before the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), against the violation of his rights, said he was wrongly arrested and put in detention.

In the suit to enforce his fundamental enforcement rights, he is specifically seeking for requisite redress under the African Charter on Human and Peoples's Rights and other International Conventions to which Nigeria is a signatory.

It was the submissions of his counsel that the unlawful detention of his client from October 14, 2015 till January 20, 2016, without any lawful orders of court, and in flagrant disobedience of orders of courts of competent jurisdiction, all ordering his unconstitutional release and discharge, amounted to a gross violation of his fundamental human rights.

Ejiofor, who chronicled all the alleged abuses of Kanu's fundamental human rights stated that he was discharged by a Chief Magistrate Court in Abuja  in the First Information Report  filed against him which contained bogus and frivolous allegations.

 He said: "The Department of State Security Services, that dragged him to court refused to obey the orders of the same court."

 The statement further reads: "Recalled that on December  29, 2015, during the Presidential Media Chat, the President told the whole world that Nnamdi Kanu cannot be granted bail, alleging that he came into the country without a valid travelling passport. This pronouncement was roundly condemned by both local and international commentators. His pronouncement was viewed as a clear usurpation of the functions and powers if the judiciary.

"Though very regrettable and extremely unfortunate, Nnamdi Kanu was refused bail on 29 January, 2016. In refusing him and other defendants bail, the court also cited the facts of his possession of dual passports as a flight risk, and as such held that he cannot be granted bail."

This position, according to Ejiofor "was in keeping in line with the pronouncement of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in his media chat telecasted live on December 29, 2015. It is a case of a witch crying in the night and a baby dying in the morning.

"The same Kanu who has been announced to the whole world. To have sneaked into the country without valid passport, now has his two valid passports (British and Nigerian) seized by the operatives of the DSS.

"A formal application to secure the release of these two passports was made in open court by Nnamdi Kanu's defence team in February 9, 2016, which the learned trial judge in his ruling delivered on that same day refused to grant. This is a clear indication that Nnamdi Kanu came into the country with valid travelling passports contrary to the erroneous views, expressed at the media chat."

 ‎Justice John Tsoho had on January 29, denied bail to Kanu and two other pro-Biafra agitators, Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi, who are facing trial with him. The trio are answering to a six-count treason charge that was preferred against them by the federal government. Kanu who was hitherto the Director of Radio Biafra and Television, ‎has been in detention since October 14, 2015, when he was arrested by security operatives upon his arrival in Nigeria from his base in the United Kingdom. ‎The defendants were in the charge that was signed by the Director of Public Prosecution, DPP, Mr. Mohammed Diri, alleged to have committed treasonable felony, an offence punishable under Section 41(C) of the Criminal Code Act, CAP C38 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria. ‎FG alleged that they were the ones managing the affairs of the IPOB which it described as “an unlawful society”.