1 week ago
2
A member of the House of Representatives, Obi Aguocha, has disclosed that the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, would soon be released from detention.
Obi Aguocha, who represents Ikwuano/Umuahia federal constituency in the Green Chamber, said negotiations are on to secure Kanu’s freedom.
The lawmaker stated this on Tuesday, in an interview with Arise TV. Naija News reported that Aguocha had decried the way Ndigbo are treated in the country.
Arguing that there are two rules in Nigeria, one for every other Nigerian, another for Ndigbo; the Labour Party lawmaker explained the IPOB leader ought to have been released with the privilege of Section 174 of the 1999 Constitution enjoyed by Yoruba Nation agitator, Sunday Igboho.
According to him; he, other lawmakers and Governor Alex Otti of Abia State have had consultations with the Minister of Justice Lateef Fagbemi and President Bola Tinubu.
“Like I said, we’ve met with the Attorney General. I’ve met with him several times. I’ve met with his Chief of Staff of Mr. President, and many other government functionaries. The only person I have not met one-on-one now is Mr. President, and for obvious reasons, he has to be satisfied with the legal position and also satisfied with the security positions.
“I am very optimistic that after all said and done… Recently, my Governor, Dr. Alex Otti, also talked about it; having met Mr. President and some assurances were given to my Governor by Mr. President.
“Those assurances that have been given to my Governor remain consistent with the assurances also that I have been given and the things that I have worked with certain circle that have been put up for this,” Aguocha said.
Speaking further, he highlighted that Kanu will be released by virtue of Section 174 or in line with Supreme Court’s earlier judgement concerning his alleged abscondment.
“I’m very optimistic that within no short distance time, Mazi Nnamdi Kalu will be released from detention, whether it’s going to be released by the invocation of section 174 or whether it’s going to be granted bail.
“The Supreme Court, after all, said that the lower court ought not to have revoked his bail, considering the circumstances that he faced before he absconded.
“Meaning the military came to his home, ransacked his home, and he escaped. Possibly, if he was there, he would have been shot dead, just like many others. The Supreme Court heard that under the circumstances, his actions of running away was justifiable, that’s what the Supreme Court said.
“Since they have already said that he cannot be denied bail. It is also our desire that if bail can be granted to him, I am willing, able to come to sign that bail so that he can have the ability to leave detention, at least to be able to take care of himself, see his family, and undertake other activities that such a person should you,” the Labour Party lawmaker added.
English (US) ·