Nnamdi Kanu
Punch
columnist, Leka Sotey has revisited the Nnamdi Kanu issue which has
become a subject of litigation implication a People's Democratic Party
chieftain, Abaribe.
Justice Binta Murtala-Nyako has given Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe
certain conditions before he can be discharged from being surety for
missing leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, who
recently failed to appear in court.
Federal prosecutors insist that Abaribe, as surety, must account
for the whereabouts of Kanu. But he claims that his last contact with
Kanu was on Monday, September 11, 2017, a day after Kanu’s home was
invaded by the military.
Kanu reportedly spoke to journalists on the day of the invasion: “I
was sleeping this evening (of Sunday, September 10, 2017) when suddenly
I was woken up by blaring of sirens… The blaring persisted, and was
followed by sporadic gunshots. The soldiers wanted to bulldoze their way
into the palace, but IPOB members formed a human shield, and resisted
them.”
If Kanu granted this seeming press interview on Sunday, September
10, Senator Abaribe saw him on Monday, September 11, and a detachment of
the Nigerian Army under the Operation Python Dance II surrounded his
home on Tuesday, September 12, after which he got missing, methinks the
Army may have some explanation to make.
Kanu’s lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, taking full advantage of this
window, told Justice Murtala-Nyako that Kanu got missing after the Army
invaded his home. Therefore, he argues, the Army, or the government by
extension, was in the best position to produce Kanu. It’s difficult to
fault this argument.
Those savvy in the ways and methods of security services speculate
that a second visit to Kanu’s home by the Army may have been occasioned
by the need to scoop evidence to confirm what might have been revealed
during interrogation of persons arrested during the first raid.
But did Ejiofor, Abaribe, or Kanu’s younger brother, Emmanuel, do
the needful by reporting to the Divisional Police Office nearest to
Kanu’s home that he got missing after Operation Python Dance II soldiers
marched their jackboot footsteps to his home? Probably not.
It was necessary to go through that motion, and not get carried
away by the euphoria or confusion of the heat of the moment. A video
clip showing bullet pockmarks, ransacked closets, scattered personal
effects, a tale of stolen television sets, generator, and clothes, and
unsubstantiated allegations of the arrest of a man with weapon, cannot
amount to judicious notice in the eye of the law.
Even the claim by IPOB spokesman, Emma Powerful, that “(A) combined
team of (army, police, and Department of Security Services agents)
arrived in Kanu’s house with armoured vehicles, and sophisticated
weapons,” is at best the report of a biased witness.
A formal report is even more pertinent, now that Orji Uzor Kalu, a
former Governor of Abia State, who was reported to have claimed that
Kanu had escaped to London, via Malaysia, has denied he ever said so. He
only volunteered that, “(A) relation (of Kanu) told me I should not
worry about (Kanu’s) safety, because I told him that what matters to me
is the safety of the man.” The police may need to ask Orji Kalu to
produce that Kanu relation.
But despite the omissions by Kanu’s sympathisers, defence lawyers,
and public relations agents, government cannot deny that its agents
entered into the home of Kanu, and it was after this event that Kanu,
his parents, some of his siblings, or their bodies, got missing.
If indeed the Army reportedly raided the secretariat of Abia State
secretariat of the Nigeria Union of Journalists, because somebody took
photographs of them from the secretariat, it sounds like somebody wants
to destroy, or retrieve, evidence of something.
This is plausible, if the Army, in compliance with the practice of
modern armies, recorded a video of its entry into the home of Kanu.
Abaribe may have to request Justice Murtala-Nyako to subpoena those
videos, if they exist, to prove, or disprove, that the Army took Kanu,
and the rest of his household, away.
From the foregoing, one could argue that the whereabouts of Kanu,
or his body, should be accounted for by Kanu himself, the Army,
occupants of the NUJ secretariat, Orji Kalu, who voluntarily entered
into the fray, some say, to jeer at Abaribe, Kanu’s relation who spoke
with the former governor, and Abaribe, who bailed Kanu, and has the most
legal responsibility to produce him.
Bail is a monetary or other security given to insure the appearance
of a defendant at every stage of court proceedings. Those posting bail
are in the position of surety, and the money is the security for the
accused’s appearance in court.
Bail is used to procure the release of a prisoner, to relieve him
of imprisonment, and free the state of the burden of keeping him,
pending trial, or hearing. A surety, like Senator Abaribe, undertakes to
pay in the event the accused fails to show up. A bail bond, like the
one Abaribe entered into, is a promissory note, executed to secure the
release of an individual in the custody of the law.
And Justice Murtala-Nyako has rightly asked Abaribe to produce Kanu
in court; request more time to do so; forfeit his N100 million bail
bond, or possibly become a guest of the Comptroller-General of the
Nigerian Prisons Service.
The demand by Justice Murtala-Nyako is a positive step in
unravelling the whereabouts of Kanu, and she must be firm with Abaribe,
who will be forced to call on the Army to show causes why they should
not be helping him to determine the whereabouts of Kanu, or his body.
Justice Murtala-Nyako, who granted bail to Kanu on health grounds
on April 28, 2017, gave some rather stiff conditions, most of which Kanu
has flouted, to the discomfiture of Abaribe, who undertook to guarantee
his good conduct: Kanu must not hold rallies, grant (press) interviews,
and be in a crowd of more than 10 persons at a time.
He must deposit his Nigerian and British passports with the court,
provide the court with progress reports of his health, provide three
sureties in the sum of N100m each, one of whom must be resident, and
have landed property, in Abuja.
The second surety must be a cleric of Judaism, the Jewish religion
of Kanu. Abaribe became the third surety because he is Kanu’s senator,
representing Abia South Senatorial district in the Nigerian Senate.
In order to further complicate Abaribe’s plight, the Attorney
General of the Federation has asked the court to revoke Kanu’s bail
because of his flagrant disobedience of the bail conditions, which he
has observed largely in the breach. Many saw that coming.
The AGF has added even more fuel to the fire: “The first
defendant (Kanu), in furtherance of the offence he was charged (with),
inaugurated (the unconstitutional) Biafra Secret Service.” A lawyer
has said that by setting up a secret service, Kanu entered into the
realm of a breach of national security, which compels his presence in
court, as well as being held in prison till he proves his innocence.
But lest these legal and public relations gymnastics become
distractions, government should direct the investigative capabilities of
the police, Army, DSS, even the National Intelligence Agency that deals
with external snoops, to find Kanu, who has undeservedly become a kind
of hero.
Twitter @lekansote1
0 comments:
Post a Comment