IPOB Rejects Army Investigations, Wants ICC’s Investigation

Lt-Gen. Tukur Yusufu Buratai

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has rejected the moves by the Nigerian Army to investigate the alleged killings of pro-Biafra activists in Aba, the commercial city of Abia State on February 9, 2016.

The Chief of Army Staff (COAS), Lt. Gen Tukur Buratai, had last week announced that the army was “already investigating” the incident as it was usually “our procedure” to investigate incidents involving loss of lives.
But in a statement issued by its spokespersons, Emma Nmezu and Dr Clifford Iroanya, IPOB demanded an impartial investigative team, arguing that “the army is the aggressor” in the incident under investigation.

“The so-called investigating team arranged by the Chief of Army Staff is foundationally riddled with conflict of interest and lacks the moral compass to conduct quality investigation in a case of this magnitude,” IPOB said.
The pro-Biafra organisation recommended that the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague should wade into the matter because it is “the only credible entity which can carry out in-depth investigation” and give an unbiased report.
To achieve the expected impartial investigation, IPOB called on the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) and other allied organisations to intervene and work with the  ICC to conduct a thorough investigation.

Alluding to the statement credited to COAS saying that soldiers could not have opened fire on the activists without provocation, IPOB said it was as “open confession” that the army “actually shot and killed unarmed Biafrans.”
It therefore insisted that an impartial investigation of the February 9 incident was necessary as “it is now indisputable that unarmed Biafrans were mowed down by the Nigerian soldiers.”

The IPOB also faulted Buratai for saying that troops could not just open fire as the army has rules of engagement and that “in situations that entail the use of fire, the protection of human rights does not apply.” He was also quoted to have said: “The 1999 Constitution and the Armed Forces Act all provided for eh use of force when necessary.”
IPOB said: ”But we could not locate in any of the 320 sections and seven schedules of the 1999 Constitution which section that supported the dastardly acts of his soldiers. Neither did we find in any of the 292 sections and four schedules of the Armed Forces Act, CAP – A20 LFN 2004, where it stipulated the shooting of unarmed peaceful civilians in peacetime within the Federation of Nigeria

”In addition, the civilised world will be interested to know what the Nigerian Army’s Rules of Engagement (ROE) are when confronted with Christians praying in a separate ground.“
Meanwhile, the 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, 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 requisite redress under the African Charter on Human and People’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 unconditional 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 Services (DSS), that dragged him to court refused to obey the orders of the same court.”

The statement further read: Recalled that on December 29, 2015, during the Presidential Media Chat, the president told the whole world that Nnamdi Kanu could not 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 couldnot 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 Kanu’s defence team on 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 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.
The federal government alleged that they were the ones managing the affairs of the IPOB which it described as “an unlawful society.”

Kanu, was alleged to have illegally smuggled radio transmitters into Nigeria, which he used to disseminate “hate broadcasts,” encouraging the “secession of the Republic of Biafra,” from Nigeria. However, the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge on January 20, even as the court ordered their remand at Kuje prison in Abuja.