Connect with us

News

How FG Made Nnamdi Kanu Flee Nigeria – Lawyer, Ejimakor

Published

on

Aloy Ejimakor, lawyer to Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, has disclosed that the agitator is ready to prove to the world that he did not jump bail in 2017.

Speaking exclusively with DAILY POST, the lawyer said the IPOB leader will prove that the Nigerian government made him flee Nigeria.

Ejimakor said the military invasion of Kanu’s residence and threat to his life made him unable to attend his trials and flee Nigeria.

Kanu was arrested and arraigned in court for charges bordering on treason in 2017.

Justice Binta Nyako of an Abuja Federal High Court had granted him bail in 2017.

Kanu, however, failed to continue his trial after a military invasion of his home in Afaraukwu, Abia State.

After the military invasion, the IPOB leader fled the country to Europe, where he operated and coordinated his agitation for Biafra from.

Few weeks ago, he was captured by the Nigerian government in an African country believed to be Kenya and repatriated to Nigeria to continue his trial before Justice Nyako.

Upon his return, Justice Nyako had ordered that he should be remanded in the custody of the Department of State Services, DSS.

Amid this, there have been wild speculations that Kanu jumped bail in 2017.

However, Ejimakor dismissed the claims of jumping bail, stressing that the threat to Kanu’s life made him flee the country.

Ejimakor said: “Despite what he has passed through, Nnamdi Kanu was in high spirits when I met with him yesterday, July 17; and he is looking forward to the first opportunity to debunk this whole story of him jumping bail. To date, he has never had such an opportunity even as he had previously requested it in the proper forum.

“In my considered view, Kanu never jumped bail, something made him to flee Nigeria and not attend his trial in October in 2017.

Biafra: Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer gives update on IPOB leader’s condition in DSS custody

“That something was the military invasion of his homestead, which was subsequently brought to the attention of the court in an application that was never heard to this day.

“So, perhaps, this whole unfortunate incident would provide the first opportunity to ventilate this nagging question of jumping bail, as it will easily be shown that Kanu never made a voluntary decision not to attend his trial. Jumping bail takes some sort of voluntary act on the part of the defendant.

“Kanu’s case is purely a case of involuntary act or omission brought by the actions of the Nigerian government that had him on trial and thus held an abiding legal interest for him to remain in Nigeria to take his trial. In truth, it is the same Nigerian government that claims Kanu jumped bail and thus seeks to benefit from it that destroyed Kanu’s capacity or duty to appear at his trial.

“On the preponderance of the evidence, it would be unreasonable for anybody to conclude that Kanu jumped bail. It’s not a case of jumping bail simpliciter. Rather, it is a clear case of an adverse party forcing Kanu to flee, only to turn around and accuse him of jumping bail.

“If you get over the issue of Kanu jumping bail, then the bench warrant upon which his rendition from Kenya was grounded would, in hindsight, be seen to be wrong. It is a causal chain. Kanu was free on bond, the government invaded his home and to his credit, he successfully fled from the danger. But instead of giving him a hearing on why he fled, you declare him a fugitive and ultimately rendition him on account of that. That’s not acceptable. The government cannot profit from its own wrong.

“The rendition can’t stand because this entire thing was caused by the invasion and not by Kanu. But even if he jumped bail, extradition, not extraordinary rendition is the only legal pathway to forcing him back to Nigeria. But I can tell you that in the unique circumstances of Kanu, any extradition proceedings, either in Britain or Kenya, would have been summarily denied. That’s probably why Nigeria never bothered to apply for it. Better yet, extraordinary rendition may be a Pyrrhic victory but in the long run, it creates a helluva of legal, political and diplomatic problems for any persons or entities complicit in it.”

 

News

Breaking: Court Frees Sunday Ighoho’s 12 Aides On Bail

Published

on

By

Justice Obiora Egwuatu of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled that the detained 12 associates of the advocates for Yoruba nation, Chief Sunday Adeyemo popuplarly known as SundayIgboho be granted bail immediately.

 

Justice Egwuatu after  entertaining arguments from lawyers to the applicants and the Department of State Services (DSS) that is detaining them ordered that they be released on bail.

Applicants’ lawyer, Pelumi Olajengbesi had prayed the court to allow his clients on bail, noting that they have been in DSS’ custody for over 30 days.

 

 

Justice Egwuatu said that the detainees are entitled to bail by the provisions of the Nigerian law having been held in custody beyond the period stipulated by law.

The judge said that the law even frowned at a situation where citizens’ liberty is curtailed under unlawful circumstances.

The suspects were granted bail on various conditions and will remain in the DSS detention until their bail conditions are perfected,Jomog.com reports.

DSS’ lawyer, Idowu Awo had earlier said he was not opposed to the court granting bail to eight of the detainees, but would oppose bail for the other four, who were still being investigated in relation to their complicity in Igboho’s alleged arm stockpiling offence.

 

 

Continue Reading

News

Court Hears Igboho’s N5bn Suit Against Malami, DSS Today

Published

on

By

The Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan has fixed August 4 for the suit filed by Yoruba Nation activist, Chief Sunday Adeyemo, aka Sunday Igboho, for an injunction to stop his arrest.

Igboho had through his counsel, Chief Yomi Aliyyu ( SAN), filed an application before the court asking for N5bn damages for the destruction of his cars and residence in Ibadan during the July 1 raid on his residence by the Department of State Services.

He also asked the court to stop the Attorney General of the Federation, DSS and other security agencies from arresting him or infringing on his fundamental human rights.

Igboho’s counsel told our correspondent in a chat that the application would be moved before the court on August 4.

He said, “On August 4, at the High Court 7 of Oyo State, we will moved for an order of interim injunction pending the hearing of the main suit for an order restraining the AGFand DSS from further breach of the applicant’s fundamental human rights.

Igboho had prayed for, “An order of injunction restraining the respondents, their agents, privies and associates in other security forces and/or anybody acting on their behalf and/or instructions from arresting, detaining, molesting, harassing and/or in any way interfering with his to personal liberty, freedom of movement of Chief Sunday Adeyemo Sunday Igboho, enjoyment of his property without fear of invasion of his home by the respondents and their agents,” among others.

 

Source: ThePUNCH

 

Continue Reading

News

Court Orders EFCC To Unfreeze Dokpesi’s Account, Release Seized Documents

Published

on

By

The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, Justice John Tsoho, on Tuesday issued an order unfreezing the N2.1 billion bank account of the founder of Daar Communications Plc, Chief Raymond Dokpesi.

Delivering a ruling in an application filed and argued by Kanu Agabi SAN on behalf of Dokpesi, Justice Tsoho said that the federal government has no basis to put a post no debit order on the account in view of the subsisting and valid order of the Court of Appeal.

Justice Tsoho ordered that the account domiciled at First Bank of Nigeria be immediately unfreezed since the criminal charges, which precipitated the restriction on the account had been dismissed and Dokpesi discharged and acquitted by the Court of Appeal.

Delivering ruling in an application filed and argued by Kanu Agabi SAN, on behalf of Dokpesi, Justice Tsoho said that the Federal Government has no basis to put a post-no-debit order on the account in view of the subsisting and valid order of the Court of Appeal.

Justice Tsoho delivered judgment after taking arguments from Dokpesi’s lawyer, Kanu Agabi, SAN and counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Oluwaleke Atolagbe.

The Chief Judge held that since the Court of Appeal delivered the judgment that invalidated the criminal charges against Dokpesi, the EFCC had not applied for stay of execution of the judgment.

Justice Tsoho said that in the absence of a stay of execution, his court was bound by law to give effect and implementation to the judgment.

He thereafter ordered that the freeze order and post-no-debit on the account be immediately removed in compliance with the appellate court’s decision.

On the claim of EFCC that it has gone on appeal to the Supreme Court, Justice Tsoho held that the notice of appeal filed at the apex court cannot in law stay the execution of the subsisting judgment adding that the anti graft agency ought to have obtained a stay of execution of the judgment.

He also ordered that all documents seized from Dokpesi or voluntarily surrendered to the Federal Government be immediately returned to him.

Atolagbe, in a bid to convince the judge, had drawn the attention of the court that the Department of State Services, DSS, and National Intelligence Agency, NIA, made respondents in the matter, did not appear before the court and as such the court can not make valid order against them.

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

%d bloggers like this: