5 months ago
37
The consideration for out of court settlement by the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has opened another vista in his struggle for the restoration of republic of Biafra and the search for the restoration of law and order in the South East zone of the country.
Last Wednesday, Kanu who had been detained since June 2021 following his arrest in Kenya and extradition to Nigeria had hinted that he intends to seek an out of court settlement in the treasonable felony charge brought against him by the Federal Government.
Speaking through his lead counsel, Alloy Ejimakor, the IPOB leader told the Federal High Court in Abuja that he would seek the negotiation under Section 17 of the Federal High Court Act.
Ejimakor had earlier brought two applications before the court. The first application was to move Form 49 while the second was an application objecting to the jurisdiction of the court.
He stated that if the applications were denied, his client would move for the implementation of Section 17 of the Federal High Court Act.
The Act states: “In any proceeding in the court, the court may promote reconciliation among parties thereto and encourage and facilitate the amicable settlement thereof.”
In response to the issue of Section 17 of the High Court Act, 2011, the prosecution lawyer, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), informed the court that he does not have the instruction of his client to embark on any negotiations with the defendant over the charge. Awomolo noted that he had told Ejimakor to go to the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) who has the power.
However, trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako, who observed that the court has no problem if the parties want to discuss negotiation, urged Kanu to approach the AGF who is the proper person to negotiate with.
The ordeal of the Biafra irredentist actually began in 2015, when he was first arrested in Lagos by the Department of State Services (DSS) and arraigned at Magistrate’s Court on charges of treason. He was granted bail two years later in 2017 on health grounds. However, while enjoying his bail, he fled the country the same year after his home was raided by the military during which some members of the IPOB were allegedly killed. The soldiers were said to have invaded his Afaraukwu residence in Umuahia, Abia State, with dangerous weapons, leading to his escape and reappearance later in 2018 from an undisclosed location.
His reappearance had strengthened the struggle as his broadcasts on Radio Biafra seemed to be the tonic his members needed to wax stronger. In between the period he was away from the country, the Federal Government declared the IPOB a terrorist organisation and therefore proscribed it.
However, in 2023, an Enugu High Court nullified the proscription and awarded damages against the Federal Government and South East governors. The court had ordered the Federal Government and the governors to issue a letter of apology to Kanu and to pay him N8 billion in damages. The government appealed the judgment and the matter has been pending in court.
Since he was arrested and extradited to Nigeria in 2021, Kanu has continued to appear in court. He had earlier pleaded not guilty to the terrorism and treason charges and had in 2022 secured the dismissal of the charges against him by the court. The court had gone further to discharge him.
But the Federal Government had appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court and in December last year, the court ordered a retrial of the matter at the Federal High Court. That is where the matter is currently as he has remained in the detention facility of the Department of State Services (DSS)
Interventions
In the last three years that Kanu has been in detention, the Southeast region has literally known no peace as insecurity and disorder have increased in the area. Members of his group had in response to his detention declared a weekly Monday sit-at-home in the region in solidarity over his ordeal. Although they later annulled the order when it became clear that it was impacting the economy of the zone negatively, miscreants who allegedly infiltrated the IPOB have since made mince meat on innocent residents who dared to step out on a Monday, thereby forcing them to stay at home. They have also formed the habit of imposing any other day that they wish as a sit-at-home on the people of the zone.
The increase in killings, kidnappings and several other vices in the zone have also brought the economy of the region almost to knee level, as businesses have either crumbled or relocated out of the region. This has led to an increase in the number of security checkpoints in the region. In some of the checkpoints, commuters are subjected to disembarking from their vehicles and walking past before continuing their journey.
Perturbed by the negative toga Kanu’s incarceration was putting on the region, notable Igbos leaders and other Nigerians had appealed to the Federal Government to drop the charges against Kanu and free him. Among them were Chief Mbazulike Amechi, Chief Chukwuemeka Ezife and Ambassador George Obiozor of blessed memories.
They were unanimous that the court would not solve the problem and suggested a political solution or dialogue on the issue. In fact, Amechi had led a delegation to the immediate past president, Muhammadu Buhari, to plead that Kanu be released to him as “a parting gift”; a plea that was turned down as Buhari preferred a court resolution.
There have also been appeals for a political resolution of the matter since President Bola Tinubu assumed office last year but he has not made a categorical statement on the matter.
A few days ago, South-South leader, Chief Edwin Clark, urged President Tinubu to free Kanu by withdrawing charges against him the same way his government withdrew the three-count terrorism charge it entered against the detained President of Miyetti Allah Kautal Hore, Bello Bodejo. He stated that doing so would complete the reconciliation of Nigeria and bring an end to the needless Monday sit-at-home order in the South East region, which has disturbed businesses and civil activities in the area.
Kanu’s declaration of his readiness to settle out of court with the government appears to be the latest dimension in the matter. Since he made the pronouncement through his lead counsel, Ejimakor, observers have been asking: Would he accept to drop the Biafra agitation should such become part of the terms of the out of court settlement? Would the offer come without conditions that may make him stay longer in detention? Is it in the place of Kanu to canvas a settlement out of the court in a case he did not file? What would be its overall implication on the Biafra struggle which Kanu has championed and has been ‘persecuted’ for over the years?
Leader of the Movement for the Actualisation of Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), Uchenna Madu, who hailed the move, however, stated that it would not dwarf the struggle for Biafra realisation.
He said: “MASSOB does not see anything wrong in Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s move to negotiate his personal freedom from detention. It is his fundamental human right to decide the mode of his release from detention.
“Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is a political prisoner; one cannot rule out the political process of his release.
It is his personal decision, maybe through his legal adviser. We heard his intentions of political dialogue through his legal adviser.
“But the struggle for emancipation of Biafra from Nigeria State can never be subdued or subjected to a mere wish or dream. The Biafra revolution is destructive because God, history and humanity are on our side.
“The freedom of Biafra is different from individual freedom. Biafra is bigger than all the agitators. It can never be compromised.”
An elder statesman, Chief Chekwas Okorie, stated that he had always advocated for a political solution to Kanu’s detention, stressing that he was glad that he (Kanu) had started thinking in that direction.
Okorie said: “Records are available to show that I have always advocated a political solution to the Mazi Nnamdi Kanu saga from 2015 when he was first arrested in Lagos by the DSS. My consistent and persistent push for the political option remains eloquent until this day. I am delighted that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, through his counsel, has given the green light for the political option, which is what out of court settlement is all about.
“Some of us who mean well for him and Ndigbo in general may now weigh in on this welcome opening. The court and the government counsel have suggested reaching out to the Attorney General and Minister of Justice to explore the option of settlement out of court. While Mazi Kanu’s Counsel is on it, I urge Southeast Governors, Ohanaeze Ndigbo and anyone of us who have listening ears at the relevant quarters to seize the moment to weigh in to secure the release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.
“I passionately appeal to President Tinubu to rise to the occasion and embrace this olive branch and invoke his constitutionally guaranteed special presidential discretion to resolve the matter of Nnamdi Kanu and his other colleagues who are still in detention. I make this recommendation with the highest sense of responsibility and patriotism. The release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu is central to resolving the restiveness and, to a large extent, the insecurity of the Southeast geopolitical zone.”
To a public affairs commentator, Dr. Ambrose Igboke, Kanu’s case has always been a political one and the solution must be political.
“When a political mediation is deployed and both sides reach an understanding, the government can withdraw the charges against Kanu.
“I urge the Federal Government to consider a mediation approach towards bringing this matter to a speedy conclusion,” Igbokwe said.
Apex Igbo socio-cultural organisation, Ohanaeze Ndigbo, insisted that the issues Kanu saw that made him and his members rise in agitation have not been addressed.
National Publicity Secretary of Nnamdi Kanu, Dr. Alex Ogbonnia, noted that there could not have been any need for the agitations if previous governments had considered Igbo as an integral part of the country, stressing that it was in realisation of this that the apex Igbo body called for political treatment of Kanu’s issue.
“The settlement out of court is in line with Ohanaeze Ndigbo’s stand and it is left for the Federal Government to embrace it as a way of solving the problems in the South East. When you are talking about a political solution, you look at the demand by IPOB and why they are demanding what they are demanding.
“Nigeria is for all of us but making it look as if there are certain elements that should benefit from it more than others is where the problem lies. If you look at the recent release by the President General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Chief Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu, what he is saying is that the marginalisation against Igbo is real and that is what the IPOB has been saying. So, the position Kanu has taken has been the position of Ohanaeze Ndigbo and that is why we said this matter requires a political solution.
“We have always said that it requires some dialogue. We have even said that even the insecurity in the region should be tackled with a non-kinetic approach. It is not a matter of blocking the road everywhere in the name of fighting insecurity. Since they started these special operations, it has not solved any problem. The insecurity and restiveness in the South East is not likely to end with the government’s approach to it. This is because they see the insecurity here as a South East thing not knowing that whatever affects the South East affects the rest of the country,” Ogbonnia stated.
However, a legal practitioner, Eze Eluchie, stated that it was not in the place of Kanu to initiate anNnamdi Kanu settlement but the Federal Government which dragged him to court and brought charges against him.
Explaining that the government had shown manifest bias since the matter started, he wondered how the same government that woke up one morning and withdrew terrorism charges against the leader of Myetti Allah could not do so in the issue of Kanu if it wanted the matter settled.
“If the government can withdraw its own charges against the Myetti Allah leader, why can’t the same government do so for Kanu? It’s not even for Kanu to talk about out-of-court settlements; it is the man who is holding the keys that should be talking about out-of-court settlements.
“Assuming it is the proposal, if there are no strings attached to it, he should accept but if there are restrictions in the discussion, it will be foolhardy for anyone to agree to it.
“The Attorney General withdrew all cases against the Myetti Allah leader. If they had wanted a similar thing for the IPOB leader, the government would have long looked into that kind of arrangement, which would have ushered peace across the region. The issue of out of court settlement is at the instance of the persecutors.
“I believe that this new gambit is one of their media shows which will be of no moment. The next adjourned date is September and there has been new media trial where the lawyers are trying to showcase themselves without any movement of an inch trying to secure the release of Kanu,” he said.
Eluchie, however, added that a possible withdrawal of the charges may not compromise the struggle for Biafra, stressing that, “it will mean that the issue of Biafra and that of the South East will now commence.”
“The detention is just to keep him out of the system and we have seen the amount of violence unleashed on the South East following the unnecessary detention of the young man. The Federal Government knows that they have shortchanged the South East in diverse areas. There are issues of marginalisation, under-representation in government, infrastructure and what have you. So, they could do well to ask why they are agitating and find ways to solve them,” he added.
English (US) ·