Fayose Reveals Why Buhari Has Refused To Release Nnamdi Kanu [DETAILS]

Ekiti state governor, Ayo Fayose has described President Muhammadu Buhari’s condemnation of Sunday’s terrorist attack on the Grand Bassam Resort in Cote D’Ivoire as a display of hypocrisy and an evident demonstration of his insensitivity to the plight of Nigerians.

  Fayose wondered why President Buhari chose to keep quiet for two days after Fulani herdsmen murdered over 300 people in Benue, but immediately reacted to the killing of 16 people in Cote D’Ivoire.
In a statement issued by his Special Assistant on Public Communications and New Media, Lere Olayinka, the governor said: “If President Buhari could afford to pick his phone and call the Ivorian President, Alassane Ouattara, immediately after the attack, Nigerians must ask the President why he kept mute for days over the Fulani herdsmen massacre of over 300 Agatu people of Benue State, the Mile 12 Lagos killings and wanton destruction of properties among others.”
“From all indications, our President has abandoned governance. The only thing going on in the minds of those running the affairs of this country in Abuja is how to entrench themselves in power by crushing anyone perceived as capable of hindering them.”
“That is the reason they are using the Department of State Services (DSS) to harass and intimidate us here in Ekiti, under flimsy excuses like investigating members of the State House of Assembly for alleged forgery of tax certificates when the Ekiti State Government, which issued the certificates have not complained to the DSS that its tax certificates were forged by the lawmakers.
“That is also the reason the President keeps showing his anger against Nnamdi Kanu and his Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB) agitators while the same President has failed to approach the economy and insecurity, especially the Fulani herdsmen menace with the same level of anger.”
“Even when their own Information Minister, Lai Mohammed has told Nigerians that the economy has gone out of the hands of the President, they keep using anti-corruption fight to persecute opposition elements both in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and their own party, All Progressives Congress (APC), forgetting that fighting corruption is not a substitute for putting food on the table of Nigerians.”
“The President must therefore be made to realise that Nigerians are suffering, with price of foodstuffs skyrocketing. The economy is in comatose, Boko Haram and Fulani herdsmen are killing people. President Buhari must learn to begin to cry over Nigeria’s problems first before going to other countries to cry over their problems for them.”

Read full details of Nnamdi Kanu's case against Nigeria at the ECOWAS Court and why Nigeria is in serious trouble

Read full details of Nnamdi Kanu's case against Nigeria at the ECOWAS Court and why Nigeria is in a deep mess

Nigeria is in for serious trouble having breached  many of her obligations under the treaty of the ECOWAS, which signed to, with illegal arrest and detention of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Read below the full details of the Kanu's case against Nigeria and a brief on ECOWAS Community Court of Justice. It shows that Nigeria has thoroughly breached the ECOWAS treaty.

IN THE COMMUNITY COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECONOMIC

COMMUNITY OF WEST AFRICAN STATES (ECOWAS)

BETWEEN

NNAMDI KANU.......................................................................PLAINTIFF

1. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

2. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION DEFENDANTS & MINISTRY OF JUSTICE

3. DIRECTOR GENERAL, STATE SECURITY SERVICE

A. ARTICLES 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, AND 20 OF THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLE’S RIGHTS;

B. ARTICLES 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 12, 22 AND 26 OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS;

C. ARTICLES 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, 13, 17, 20, 21 AND 25 OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS;

D. ARTICLE 22 PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE COVENANT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS;

E. RESOLUTION 2625 (XXV) OF THE UNITED NATION CHARTER OF 1970.

A. NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PLAINTIFF

1. The Plaintiff is a Nigerian Citizen as well as British Citizen who reside at 30 Sandlings Close, Pilkington Road, London SE15 3SY England, United Kingdom.

B. DESIGNATION OF THE DEFENDANTS

1. The 1st Defendant is the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

2. The 2nd Defendant is the Chief Law Officer of the Federation.

3. The 3rd Defendant is the Head of State Security Services.

C. SUBJECT MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS

1. Violation by the Defendants of the Human Rights of the Plaintiff to life, to personal integrity, to privacy, to fair trial, to freedom of movement, to freedom of expression, to personal liberty, to freedom of Association, to private property, right to existence and right to self determination guaranteed by Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Article 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 12, 22, and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, 13, 17, 20, 21 and 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 22 paragraph 1 of the Covenant of the League of Nations and Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nation Charter of 1970.

D. FACTS

i. The Federal Republic of Nigeria is a signatory to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other similar regional and International Human Rights Treaties.

ii. The Federal Republic of Nigeria is also a signatory to the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States dated 24th July, 1993.

iii. Nigeria ratified both the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in October, 1993. Nigeria ratified the African Charter on 22nd July, 1983.

iv. The Plaintiff is the Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra and director of Radio Biafra, a legitimate body duly registered under the relevant regulatory Laws in the United Kingdom and under the United Nation regulation.

v. The 1st Defendant is the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

vi. The 2nd Defendant is the Chief Law Officer of the Federation.

vii. The 3rd Defendant is the Head of Nigerian State security Agencies.

E. NARRATION OF FACTS BY THE PLAINTIFF

i. The suit is brought by the Plaintiff against the Federal Republic of Nigeria, a member of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and a state party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and other related Human Rights Treaties.

ii. Radio Biafra is registered transmission station, run from London and propagates its frequencies all over the world.

iii. The Plaintiff was arrested in Lagos on the 14th day of October, 2015, by the operatives of the 3rd Defendant on the instigation of the 1st Defendant and upon his arrival from the United Kingdom.

iv. Upon his arrest, he was subjected to the most inhuman and degrading treatment by the personnel of the 3rd Defendant, as he was excessively tortured, assaulted, humiliated, handcuffed and all his valuables confiscated by the 3rd Defendant’s strike force, who obviously were acting a specific script.

v. Following public outcry and International condemnation that greeted the unlawful, illegal and unjust arrest of the Plaintiff, the personnel of the 3rd Defendant (Department of State services) hurriedly transferred him to their Abuja National Headquarters for further interrogation, torture and onward detention.

vi. On the 19th day of October 2015, the 3rd Defendant reluctantly arraigned the Plaintiff at a Chief Magistrate Court of the Federal Capital Territory (before Hon. A.U Shuaibu) on conjectured and frivolous allegation of Criminal conspiracy, managing and belonging to an unlawful society and criminal intimidation.

vii. The Honourable presiding Chief Magistrate after listening to the oral application for the bail of the Plaintiff accordingly granted him bail on terms and conditions that were spelt out in the Ruling of the Court delivered same day.

viii. The terms and conditions given for the bail of the Plaintiff was promptly satisfied, but the 3rd Defendant, neglected and flagrantly disobeyed this order, and continued to detain the Plaintiff who was being kept in the most dreaded detention centre of the 3rd Defendant, where the Plaintiff shared common cell with violent criminals and notorious terrorists members.

ix. Desperate attempt by the 3rd Defendant to obtain an obnoxious but repressive Order from the Federal High Court Abuja, that will legitimize the Plaintiff’s further detention in their facility for another period of 90 days was strongly challenged.

x. Ex-parte Order obtained on the 15th day of November, 2015 by the 3rd Defendant in the Federal High Court Abuja to detain the Plaintiff for another period of 90 days, was promptly vacated by the same Judge Hon. Justice A.f.A Ademola, upon being presented with the facts and history of the 3rd Defendant’s affront to Judicial Orders. The Judge proceeded to direct the 3rd Defendant to release the Plaintiff unconditionally without further ado.

xi. The 3rd Defendant still failed to obey the order of the Court of competent jurisdiction directing the immediate release of the Plaintiff.

xii. Cumulatively, the Plaintiff was illegally, and unjustly detained, incarcerated, tortured and assaulted by the 3rd Defendant from the 14th day of October, 2015 to the 20 and still being held in the Defendants captivity, based on the most unfounded, frivolous and bogus charges preferred against the Plaintiff, which was only read to the Plaintiff on the 20th day of January, 2016, after spending over 100 days in custody, and despite lawful orders of the Court directing his unconditional release.

xiii. During the December 2015 presidential media chat of the 1st Defendant, aired in both International and local media, the 1st Defendant announced to the whole world that the Plaintiff cannot be granted bail, a clear indication that the Nigerian judiciary is under his whims and caprices as far as this matter is concerned.

xiv. The Plaintiff who is a political prisoner is being subjected to this life threatening and most bizarre experience because he is the Leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra, and director of Radio Biafra.

xv. The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is an organization that is legitimately registered under the United Nation’s relevant regulation and enjoys the recognition of the United Nation.

xvi. The activities of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) are guided by the United Nation Charter on the Right to Self Determination, which also provides a legal framework to their legitimate agitation of Biafra state.

xvii. The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is also duly registered in United Kingdom where its headquarters is situated.

xviii. The Plaintiff contends that the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is an organization that pursues the specific right of the Indigenous People of Biafra to seek for their self-determination in accordance with the United Nation Charter, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other relevant International Convention and Treaties to which Nigeria is a signatory.

xix. The Plaintiff contends that his illegal and unlawful detention incarceration, torture and seizure of his valuables by the 3rd Defendant is in flagrant disobedience to various orders of Court of competent jurisdiction, a gross violation of his human rights as clearly provided for under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, United Nation General Assembly Resolution on the Rights to Self Determination and other International Conventions to which Nigeria is a signatory.

xx. The Plaintiff contends that in brutal response to various civil but peaceful protests organized by the members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), particularly in Aba, Abia State, Nigeria, in total rejection of his continued illegal detention and incarceration, the 1st Defendant through his chain of commands, directed heavy gun wielding combined team of Military personnel and Police to shoot at sight the defenseless, unarmed and innocent citizens.

xxi. The Plaintiff states that over a hundred members of the Indigenous People of Biafra were gunned down at various locations in Aba, Abia State on the 29th day of January, 2016; 9 day of February, 2016 and 19th day of February, 2016.

xxii. The Plaintiff states that Amnesty International has embarked on aggressive and extensive investigation of this heinous crime against humanity and their preliminary findings/reports had condemned the unwholesome activities of the combined team of military and police personnel who perpetrated this crime.

xxiii. The Nigerian Government has continued to suppress, maim, arrest and kill the members of the Indigenous People of Biafra in clear violation of their Human Rights.

xxiv. The Plaintiff contends that the above highlighted Human Rights, Social and Cultural Rights as well as Civil and Political Rights are recognized and guaranteed by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other related Human Rights Treaties to which Nigeria is a state party.

xxv. Given other regional Human Rights Jurisprudence in this field, the Plaintiff contends that the ECOWAS Court can play a significant role in emphasizing on the protection of the Human

Rights of the Plaintiff.

F. SUMMARY OF PLEAS IN LAW APPLICABILITY OF THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS

Article 4 of the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), 1993 provides for the applicability of the provisions of the Africa Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right to Member States of the ECOWAS as follows:

The High contracting parties in pursuits of the objective stated in Article 3 of this Treaty, solemnly affirm and declare their adherence to the following principle;

4(g) ... recognition, promotion and protection of Human Peoples’ Right in accordance with the provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

WHEREAS the Federal Republic of Nigeria has ratified and adopted the provisions of Article 1 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right which provides that;

Article 2 of the Charter provides that;

Article 3 of the Charter provides that;

Article 4 of the Charter provides that;

Article 5 of the Charter provides that;

Article 6 of the Charter provides that;

Article 9 of the Charter provides that;

Article 10 of the Charter provides that:

Article 11 of the Charter provides that;

Article 14 of the Charter proves that;

Article 20 of the Charter provides the;

It is hereby submitted that under the combined Articles 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights which Nigeria is a signatory, the Defendants have individually and collectively violated the Human Rights of the Plaintiff to life, to dignity of human person, to judicial guarantee, to fair trial, to private property, to freedom of expression, to liberty, to movement, to association, to Assembly and to self determination.

It is submitted further that the detention of the Plaintiff by the Defendants, in the most inhuman conditions and dreaded Detention Centre of the 3rd Defendant, torture, incarceration, assault, for over a period of hundred days, even in flagrant disobedience to all orders of the Court of competent jurisdiction directing his release, the killing of the unarmed members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) by the Defendants’ agents, amount to serious but gross breaches of the obligations and commitment of the Nigerian Government under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the International Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and United Nation General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV), of the United Nation Charter of 1970.

These International Instruments establish the duty of the States parties including Nigerian Government to respect and ensure respect for the rights that they protect. The Plaintiff contends that these human rights have been violated by the Defendants and their agents by a set of actions and omissions.

The Plaintiff contends that freedom of assembly, movement, expression, liberty and self-determination as clearly provided under the African Charter above enumerated are essential to the condition of free development of a person, and consist inter-alia of the right of those who are legally within a State to move freely, express their opinion, protest against unjust acts of the oppressors within the State.

The members of the Indigenous People of Biafra being led by the Plaintiff are presently exposed to a much higher level of vulnerability in the hands of the armed forces specifically detailed by the Defendants to ensure total annihilation of the members of the Indigenous People of Biafra, at all cost and by any means, this action of the Defendants and their agents entails a grave, massive and systematic violation of the fundamental rights of the Indigenous People of Biafra including the Plaintiff, who had been arbitrarily held in captivity by the Defendants.

In totality, the Plaintiff contends that the Nigerian Government has not only failed or neglected to prevent the violation of the Human Rights of the Plaintiff, but had continued to wantonly violate the human rights of the Plaintiff through the unjust, illegal and unlawful incarceration of the Plaintiff, in clear contradiction to their obligation to protect and guarantee the existence/enjoyment of the human rights of the Plaintiff as clearly mandated under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Covenant of the League of Nations, and Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nation Charter of 1970.

G. ORDERS SOUGHT BY PLAINTIFF

The Plaintiff therefore is asking the ECOWAS Court of Justice for the following Reliefs:

1. A DECLARATION that the arrest and detention of the Plaintiff since the 14th day of October, 2015, torture and his incarceration in the Defendants detention Centre in flagrant disobedience to several Orders of Court of competent jurisdiction directing his unconditional release, is unlawful, as it constitutes serious breaches of Nigerian’s human rights obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and other International Human Rights Treaties to which Nigeria is a State party.

2. A DECLARATION that the killing, violent attacks, intimidation, arrest and incarceration of the unarmed Plaintiff’s supporters, members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) by the Defendants and their agents is unlawful and a crime against humanity.

3. A DECLARATION that the continued detention of the Plaintiff on  conjectured, frivolous and empty charge filed after over hundred days of his illegal and unjust incarceration in the custody of the 3rd Defendant, is unlawful, illegal and a gross breach of the Plaintiff’s human rights as recognized by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and other International Conventions to which Nigeria is a signatory.

4. AN ORDER finding the Nigerian Government responsible for these human rights violations.

5. AN ORDER directing the Nigerian Government to further release the Plaintiff, held in their captivity, unconditionally.

6. AN ORDER directing the Defendants and or/their agents individually and/or collectively to respect, protect and promote the Plaintiff’s human rights to life, to liberty, to freedom of movement, to private property, to assembly, to fair trial, to judicial guarantees, to freedom of expression and to self-determination.

7. AN ORDER directing the Defendants and/or their agents individually to release forthwith to the Plaintiff all his personal belongings confiscated at the point of his arrest.

8. AN ORDER directing the Defendants and/or their agents individually and/or collectively to pay adequate monetary compensation of $800 million (US Dollars) to the Plaintiff for the gross violation of his human rights, the subject matter of this suit, and to provide other forms of reparation, which may take the form of restitution, satisfaction or guarantees of non-repetition, and other forms of reparation that the Honourable Court may deem fit to grant.

9. NATURE OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT DOCUMENTARY & OTHERS:

1. The African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights.

2. UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural

3. UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Rights.

4. Economic Community of West African states (ECOWAS) Revised

Treaty dated 24th July 1993.

5. Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nation Charter of 1991.

6. Rulings of Courts of competent jurisdiction and orders made fragrantly disobeyed.

7. Photographs and video clips showing the genocidal massacre directing the Defendants to release the Plaintiff which were all and unlawful killing of the Plaintiff’s supporters (Indigenous People of Biafra members) during a civil protest in Aba, the Abia State Capital in Nigeria.

DATED THIS 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2016

PLAINTIFF’S SOLICITORS ADDRESS FOR SERVICE AT THE SEAT OF COURT

I.C EJIOFOR & CO 

SUITE 122, ANBEEZ PLAZZA

FIRST FLOOR

RIGHT WING,

OPPOSITE OLD CAC HEADQUARTERS

PLOT 2121 NDOLA CRESCENT

WUSE ZONE 5 ABUJA.

PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT SERVICES

HON. IFEANYI EJIOFOR ESQ.

CHINWE C. UMECHE (MISS)

SADIYA AHMED

SERVICE MAY ALSO BE EFFECTED ON THE PLAINTIFF’S SOLICITORS, BY ANY TECHNICAL MEANS OF COMMUNICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH

ARTICLE 33

RULE 2 

THROUGH OUR EMAIL: iclawfirm@yahoo.com

FOR SERVICE ON THE DEFENDANTS:

1. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

C/O ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION

FEDERAL MINISTRY OF JUSTICE ABUJA.

2. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION

FEDERAL MINISTRY OF JUSTICE, ABUJA.

3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL STATE

SECURITY SERVICE

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS

ASO-VILLA

ABUJA.

Brief about ECOWAS Community Court of Justice. http://biafransatellite.blogspot.my

BIAFRA: BUHARI PANICs, SEEKS TO BLOCK NNAMDI KANU'S RELEASE AT ECOWAS COURT.

. The Nigerian government plans have been thrown into a complete disarray as the embattled leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB) drags it to sub-regional court to press for his release from detention.
irked by such move by Kanu, sources in the Nigerian seat of power revealed to DailyGlobeWatch on the condition of anonymity that Buhari backed by his advisers have urged the Nigeria's strongman to remain firm and unbowed saying they stand behind him to have the detained leader confined in prison.
In a related development, our source apparently sympathetic with Nnamdi Kanu says there are ill-conceived plans by some members of OHANEZE NDIGBO to frustrate Kanu's bid to secure freedom at the regional court having being financially induced by the Nigerian government.
Said our source, ''Kanu's enemies are from his own people, some shameless members of the OHANEZE NDIGBO who have been coming here to fraternize with 'oga' to detain and slam him a life sentence''.
''I have never seen this huge act of betrayal by a particular tribe. If I may ask, why are his people like that? Some members of the OHANEZE have been financially induced to testify falsely against Kanu at the ECOWAS court'', our source added.
In a frantic move to have Kanu nailed, the Nigerian authorities, our source revealed have had the witnesses financially induced to testify against Kanu.''
His words, ''They would have no option this time but to appear before the ECOWAS court as all plans have been concluded to have them under subpoena to appear, Kanu's enemies are from among his own people''
It would be recalled, however, that Nnamdi Kanu had before now been granted bail by Nigerians courts sitting in Abuja, a move which was blocked by the Nigerian government all in a resolute bid to have the Biafran activist remain in jail. Source: http://dailyglobewatch.

BUHARI CAMPAIGNS AGAINST BIAFRA AS NNAMDI KANU ARGUES FOR BIAFRA SEPARATION FROM NIGERIA

Boris Johnson, the mayor of London will campaign for Britain to leave the EU, David Cameron, the prime minister of Britain will campaign for Britain to remain in the EU. Both men are English from the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom has four ethnic nations, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. 
According to Nicola Sturgeon, a second independence referendum will be "almost certainly" demanded by Scotts if the UK votes to leave EU but Scotland does not, the first minister has said. 

Peaceful coexistence is always and important way to go for any multi ethnic country, and that brings me to Nigeria. It is paramount to say that in a multi ethnic society, referendum is an agreed and consented process, but because Nigeria and Nigerians are gullible as well as their president, they see the refusal of Buhari to allow the bail granted by court to the Leader of Indigenous people of Biafra Nnamdi Kanu to stand as the right way to go about things. It will be interesting to see Buhari campaign against Biafra independence while Nnamdi Kanu argues for separation of Biafra from Nigeria through a referendum just like civilized counties mentioned above does.
Muhammadu Buhari declares total support for a Palestinian state, says "I want to assure you that we will stand side in side with you until our brothers and sisters in Palestine achieve their desired objectives. Our support for various security Council resolution restoring and respecting 1967 boundaries with Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine is firm and unshaken ". But why is he killing Biafrans for asking for self determination, why did he arrest Nnamdi Kanu for his ideology, why did he order the recent massacre of Biafra agitators demanding for self determination which is there right? Buhari is just a hypocrite.
Buhari contends that he supports the UN resolution restoring and respecting the 1967 boundaries with Jerusalem as a capital of Palestine, but he continues to feigned ignorance of the fact that Nigeria is a nation of nationality, some for unbroken centuries, having their own internal sovereignty, their own countries with distinct boundaries, their own cultural values, their own political systems, and even their own gods which secured in 1959, a constitution which provided for each nationality to protect that which was most precious to it and for each nationality to obtain it's own statehood within Nigeria by popular referendum which Biafra nation is among.
Nigeria is a strange country where evil is swept under the carpet and often justified, where those that exposes it and speak the truth are demolished, hated , despised and more often than not, threatened with violence, persecution, litigation, intimidation, arrest and court action, example is Nnamdi Kanu and Biafrans. 
Buhari must therefore respect the rule of law by releasing Nnamdi Kanu, he must also respect the UN charter on the right of self determination enshrined in the UN constitution and let go of Biafra hence Nigeria has expired, Biafra independence is all we seek. Give us swift Referendum now.

Written  By Anyikwa Cynthia Kelechi
Edited  By  Ikechukwu Nwaorisa
By  BIAFRA WRITERS

Buhari Change: Darkness Looms As Nigeria’s Electricity Drops From 5000mw To 2,800mw Author Zubby Date March 2, 2016 Comments: Leave a comment The Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) has said that power supply through the national grid which peaked to 5000mw in past two weeks had dropped below 2,800mw due to vandalism. Anthony Akah, the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the commission disclosed this while signing a Memorandum of Understanding with the Consumer Protection Council (CPC). In a statement issued on the ceremony by Usman Abba-Arabi, Head, Public Affairs Department of NERC, on Wednesday, Mr. Akah expressed dissatisfaction and worries over the spate of vandalism in the power sector. It stated that the NERC boss enjoined the public and the CPC to collaborate with Distribution Companies (DISCOs) and security agencies to safeguard electrical installations. ALSO READ APC Govs To Buhari We Must Keep Our Promise By Paying N5000 To Youths The statement also said that the NERC would soon compel the DISCOs to publish their meter deployment schedules. It added that the publication would ensure adherence to the meter roll out plan contained in the performance agreement signed with government by the utility firms. 鉄uch publication will make unmetered customers to be aware of the estimated period they have to wait before they can be metered,鋳 it stated. The statement stated that NERC had issued warning to the DISCOs against wrongful estimated billings and acts of compelling customers to buy, install and repair transformers and poles. ALSO READ Buhari Never Promised N5,000 Jobseeker’s Allowance -VP Osinbanjo The statement said the MoU between, NERC and CPC was part of concerted efforts to reduce the incidence of estimated billing completely. According to the statement, the Director General of CPC, Mrs. Modupe Atoki, commended NERC for the long standing relationship between the two agencies. Atoki, according to the statement, expressed CPC痴 cooperation and renewed effort to protect electricity consumers from abuse of their rights. (NAN)

Read more at: http://www.zubbyblog.com/buhari-change-darkness-looms-nigerias-electricity-drops-5000mw-2800mw

I’d rather die in jail than for Ohaneze to take glory for my release – Nnamdi Kanu

February   28,  2016

The Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB has warned those who are claiming to be representing them, including members of Ohaneze Ndigbo and its youth wing Ohaneze Youths Wing, negotiating for the release of its leader and Director of Radio Biafra, Mr. Nnamdi Kanu to stop such move, that nobody speaks or represent them, unless such person or persons are designated officers of its organisation mandated to speak for them
Mazi Nnamdi Kanu has said that he will rather die in jail that let Ohaneze Ndigbo to claim the glory of his release, saying he has no business with the Igbo Socio cultural Organization. “I will rather die in jail than for Ohaneze Ndigbo to claim the glory of my release, he said
IPOB in a statement by its spokesmen, Dr Clifford Iroanya and Barrister Emma Mmezu, said
“we are in court and our wish is to expose the fraudulent charges of treasonable felony before the whole world. At the end of this case the corrupt and compromised segment of the Nigerian judiciary will be publicly disgraced.
“Our march to freedom is unstoppable; this is something Buhari ought to know.

Nnamdi Kanu is being starved, harassed and intimidated by prison officials - IPOB

Nnamdi Kanu is being starved, harassed and intimidated by prison officials - IPOB

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has condemned in strong terms the inhuman treatment being meted to Nnamdi Kanu a leading Biafran Nationalist and leader of the IPOB. IPOB stated that Kanu is being denied access to food and toiletries and has been subjected to serious intimidation and harassment by some prison officials in Kuje prison.


According to the IPOB the attitude was meant to psychologically dampen his spirit and make him renounce Biafra. But they are confident the Kanu they know will never shift grounds on his total commitment to the actualization of sovereign state of Biafra.

IPOB however, warned that it will make Nigeria ungovernable if anything happens to him.  In a statement issued in Nnewi by the IPOB Media and Publicity officer, Mr Emma Powerful, IPOB said that the inhuman treatment being meted to Kanu was meant to weaken his resolve as directed by the Federal Government agents who are now convinced that he will be set free by the court at the end of the day.

Powerful also berated those who are claiming that the Ijaw people are not part of Biafra, adding that the Ijaws are part of the Eastern region, “and nobody will ever change a people from what they are. The Ijaws are one people with one destiny with the Biafran people of the South East.We are one family. The Igbo, Ijaw, Igala, Igbanke, Igede and others have one value system and nobody can change it.”

SBCHROs Names Nnamdi Kanu-A Prisoner-Of-Conscience. Condemns continued Persecution by Buhari and Bail Denial by Justice John Tsoho

SBCHROs Names Nnamdi Kanu-A Prisoner-Of-Conscience. Condemns continued Persecution by Buhari and Bail Denial by Justice John Tsoho

(Onitsha Nigeria, 30^th January 2016)-The Southeast Based Coalition of Human Rights Organizations (SBCHROs), coordinated by Intersociety, and comprising the following ten rights organizations: International Society for Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law (Intersociety), Anambra State Branch of the Civil Liberties Organization (CLO), Center for Human Rights & Peace Advocacy (CHRPA), Human Rights Club (a project of LRRDC)(HRC), Forum for Justice, Equity & Defense of Human Rights (FJEDHR), Society Advocacy Watch Project (SPAW), Anambra Human Rights Forum (AHRF), Southeast Good Governance Forum (SGGF), International Solidarity for Peace & Human Rights Initiative (ITERSOLIDARITY) and Igbo Ekunie Initiative (pan Igbo rights advocacy group), have firmly resolved to name Citizen Nnamdi Kanu as a prisoner-of-conscience (POC).

For the fact that Citizen Nnamdi Kanu has never killed anybody  (use violence) or authorized anybody or group to kill (advocated for violence); for the fact that he was arrested and detained for 98 days without trial contrary to Sections 35 (4) (a) (right to personal liberty), 33 (right to life), 34 (right to dignity of human person), 36 (right to fair hearing)  and 41 (right freedom of movement) of the 1999 Constitution and Articles V,VI,VII and XII of the African Charter on Human & Peoples Rights (ratified and domesticated by Nigeria in 1983); for the fact that  the Nigerian authorities led by President Muhammadu Buhari have flouted with impunity and reckless abandon several court decisions bordering on protection and enforcement of these constitutional rights of the detained Prisoner-of-Conscience; for the fact that Citizen Nnamdi Kanu’s arrest and detention was politically motivated and ill-conceived; for the fact that he was arrested and detained and is being persecuted for his non violent political and social thoughts; and for the fact that the mind of the trial Judge; Hon Justice John Tsoho was possibly abused, biased and corrupted presidentially, leading to the Judge convicting Citizen Nnamdi Kanu before trial (his choice of words); upon which Citizen Kanu was denied his long awaited and deserved bail; Citizen Nnamdi Kanu eminently deserves the local and international status of a prisoner-of-conscience.

For the purpose of refreshing the minds of all and sundry particularly the Nigerian democratic forces, Prisoner of Conscience (POC) is a term coined by Peter Benenson; founder of Amnesty International, UK in a 28 May 1961 article (“the Forgotten Prisoners") published in the London Observer Newspaper. The term refers to anyone imprisoned because of their race, sexual orientation, religion, or political views; expressed or conducted non-violently or in peaceful manners. It also refers to those who have been imprisoned and/or persecuted for non-violent expression of their conscientiously held beliefs. Amnesty International, UK  regards  prisoners of conscience  as political and activist prisoners (non white collar or street criminal suspects) or jailed international or national citizens who have been jailed or imprisoned by repressive and suppressive political authorities because of their political, religious or other conscientiously-held beliefs, ethnic origin, sex, color, language, national or social origin, economic status, birth, sexual orientation or other status, provided that they are non violent and peaceful and have never sanctioned the opposite.

The Myanmar’s leading pro democracy activist and Nobel Laureate, Ms Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is one of the world’s recognized prisoners-of-conscienceand was an Amnesty International’s prisoner of conscience (POC)  from 1989-1995; 2000 to 2002; and 2003 to 2010. Though she is banned by her country’s repressive military rulers from standing for Myanmar’s presidency since 1988 when her National League for Democracy (NLD) was heading for a landslide victory before the country’s military junta struck and annulled same; but her campaigns for restoration of democracy, civil liberties and rule of law in Myanmar recently paid off leading to full return of democracy and inauguration of its first post military’s democratically elected parliament this 1^stFebruary 2016. Though banned from holding presidency seat for now; but Ms Suu Kyi; 70, is expected to be President of her country by proxy with her NLD having won 80% of the parliamentary seats.

Beyond naming Citizen Nnamdi Kanu a prisoner-of-conscience; plans by SBCHROs are also  on the way to formally write and appeal to the likes of Amnesty International, UK,  the Human Rights Watch, USA and the Society for the Threatened People, Germany, etc to also adopt Citizen Nnamdi Kanu asa prisoner-of-conscience or be given or accorded with equivalent (s) status. As SBCHROs’ prisoner-of-conscience, Citizen Nnamdi Kanu will remain under our local, national and global campaign searchlight until he is freed, discharged and acquitted of the ongoing phantom charge of treasonable felony.

Further condemned in strongest term is possible voice of Jacob and hand of Esau in the disagreement that erupted in the legal defense team of Citizen Nnamdi Kanu to the extent that it also contributed in part to denial of bail of the detained prisoner-of-conscience by Hon Justice Tsoho; occasioned by poor bail application and watery argument by one of the defense counsel. The recent open-letter to the EU Parliament written from prison by the detainedPrisoner-of-Conscience; in which he disclosed how he was tortured and maltreated by DSS while in its captivity clearly contradicted the recent account of one of his defense counsel, who said Citizen Kanu was never tortured or maltreated by DSS and that he was even cracking jokes with his captors. Comparing the former with the latter, it is mostly safe to suspect another voice of Jacob and hand of Esau. Though Citizen Nnamdi Kanu’s bail bid was lost, but the most striking part of the last court proceedings was judicial resolution of the authenticity of Citizen Kanu’s defense legal team in his physical presence and under his written authorization. In all these, the Federal Government’s age-long divide-and-rule tactics may most likely be at work.

We are also saddened and shocked by Hon Justice John Tsoho’s reported resort to use of convictable and uncouth choice of words; upon which he based his bail refusal ruling. In over seven reports of journalists particularly judicial reporters perused in the course of our fact finding on the proceedings under reference, the same convictable and uncouth choice of words was reported to be used by the trial Judge. Hon Justice John Tsoho was specifically reported by several media sources as having said the following judgmental words “(Nnamdi) Kanu is a threat to national security, and as a result will not be granted bail”. He reportedly held further that “if released, Kanu may commit the same offence again, and that “there is a probability that he may jump bail because he possesses dual citizenship”. The judge conclusively ruled that Kanu be remanded in prison custody, and ordered an accelerated hearing of the case.

If it is true that the trial judge used such biased and judgmental words on post arraignment bail application ruling; then the Judge has already convicted and found Citizen Nnamdi guilty before trial. It is also against the CJN’s recent assurances given to Intersociety that Kanu’s case will be resolved justly and judiciously. This explains why we held that the mind of the Judge was presidentially abused, biased and corrupted. The Judge was also caught up by the presidentially bullets of hearsay and concocted facts; to the effect that Citizen Nnamdi Kanu sneaked into or entered his mother country improperly.

Our questions are: when has it become an international or national crime for a citizen to bear dual citizenship? If Hon Justice John Tsoho can be so afraid and possibly stampeded presidentially not to grant bail to a political and activist prisoner or detainee bearing mere dual citizenship; is he not aware of the revolution going on in the global judicial systems of States to the extent that many have adopted universal jurisdictions and armed with international arrest and detention warrant licenses? As recently as few years, domestic courts in Belgium, South Africa and Senegal have assumed regional and international jurisdictions and issued and executed international arrest warrants against national, regional and international citizens or nationals accused of crimes against humanity in their respective countries. Today, former Chadian military dictator and butcher; Hissene Habre is in detention in Senegal standing trial for mass murder he committed while in power in the 80s. Is the like of Hon Justice Tsoho not leading Nigerian judiciary or its segment back to the cave?

In all, we urge the new defense legal team of Citizen Nnamdi Kanu not to waste further time in appealing against the referenced judicial bail refusal decision of Hon Justice John Tsoho of the Abuja Federal High Court Three.

Signed:

For: Southeast Based Coalition of Human Rights Organizations (SBCHROs)

Emeka Umeagbalasi

Board Chairman, International Society for Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law & Coordinating Head, SBCHROs

Mobile Line: +2348174090052

Email: emekaumeagbalasi@yahoo.co.uk

Aloysius Attah

Chairman, Anambra State Branch of the Civil Liberties Organization & Media Coordinator, SBCHROs

Mobile Line: +2348035090548

Email: attahcomrade@yahoo.com