Nnamdi Kanu seeks to join lawsuit to challenge IPOB ban

Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the banned Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), has asked to be joined in a lawsuit challenging the Nigerian government's ban on IPOB, his special counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, said on Wednesday.

IPOB is a separatist group advocating for an independent state of Biafra.

On January 18, 2017, a Federal High Court in Abuja banned the group and labeled it a terrorist organization.

The lawsuit, which Mr. Kanu has expressed interest in, is said to have been filed in the Abuja Court of Appeal, against the restraining order.

It was filed by IPOB against the Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, according to information posted on Twitter by Mr. Ejimakor.

It is unclear whether the case is part of a human rights lawsuit brought by Mr Kanu against the government. The exact date the complaint was filed is unclear.

Mr. Ejimakor did not respond to PREMIUM TIMES requests for clarification on the lawsuit.

The lawyer, this newspaper learns, had, on September 5, filed a notice in court, on behalf of the leader of the IPOB, asking to be added as an interested party to the lawsuit.

"Today, I will be leading a team of lawyers at the Abuja Court of Appeal to make the case for the participation of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu as a named party in the appeal against the proscription of the 'IPOB," Mr Ejimakor tweeted on Wednesday. morning.

"I will also be teaming up with SAN Machukwu Ume, who is leading the mother case against proscription," he added.

In a notice and grounds of appeal made available to the Vanguard newspaper, Mr. Ejimakor said the IPOB leader was unhappy with the Federal High Court's ruling that banned the IPOB.

In the notice and grounds of appeal, Mr. Kanu asserted that the banning of IPOB and its listing as a terrorist organization based on an ex parte court order was unconstitutional.

Mr. Kanu also argued that his arrest, indictment and prosecution based on "said ex parte order of the court", made without his knowledge, violated his constitutional rights, in particular the right to a fair trial. p>

He said that "the trial court erred in law and thereby caused a serious miscarriage of justice which affected it" using the phrase in the decision, "the chambers judge may, on motion of the Attorney General…'”

Mr. Kanu said the sentence presupposes that the request was to be made as an ex parte request.

"The trial judge lifted the words in small quotations akin to section 2(1)(c) of the Prevention of Terrorism (Amendment) Act 2013 which had used" chambers judge, and non ex parte "in adopting the procedure for obtaining a prohibition order and the declaration of an entity as a terrorist organization", he said, pointing out that "ex parte" is different from " judge in chambers”.

Judges absent

Mr. Ejimakor will later announce that the court judges failed to appear in court for the appeal hearing, which was due to be held on Wednesday.

“Today, the three judges of the Court of Appeal failed to appear in court to hear the appeal against the IPOB proscription and my motion for authorization to join Mazi Nnamdi Kanu as a party beneficiary in appeal," he tweeted on Wednesday. afternoon.

The case was then adjourned until March 7, 2023, the attorney said.

“This is unacceptable to me and SAN Ume,” Mr. Ejimakor said of the adjournment.

Mr. Kanu has already been arrested and released on bail. He skipped bail in 2017.

He was 'intercepted' in Kenya in June last year by Nigerian security agents and brought back to Abuja.

The IPOB leader, who is on trial for terrorism at the Federal High Court in Abuja, is being held by Nigeria's secret police, SSS.

Support the integrity and credibility journalism of PREMIUM TIMES Good journalism costs a lot of money. Still...