Probe the September 2017 military invasion of Nnamdi Kanu's house – Bar. Ejiofor

NOVEMBER 3, 2019 | THE BIAFRA TIMES

By Henry Okonkwo

 Lawyer to Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), Mr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor, has said that the Federal Government is on the wild goose chase in trying to prosecute his client on treason allegation.  In this interview with Sunday Sun, Ejiofor called for a probe of the invasion of Kanu’s house at Afaraukwu, in Umuahia, Abia State, by military officers in September 2017, arguing that the onslaught was because the Federal Government knows it has no case against him.

What do you make of last Thursday’s adjournment by the Federal High Court of your application for the court to restore Nnamdi Kanu’s bail?

On the 11th of November last year the court ordered the sureties to show cause why they should not forfeit their bail bond. And made marching orders, which the sureties also challenged. So, on the 28th of March 2019, they reported to the court that an appeal has been entered, to which the court suspended proceedings in that respect. The business of that day was to continue with the sureties’ proceedings. But the court immediately rushed into making an order revoking my client’s bail. So, I fault the court on the circumstance that they have no such powers to do that because that wasn’t what the court was sitting for. So I filed an application to vacate the order because it was made without jurisdiction. That application has been served to the prosecution (Federal Government) since April this year. And they never responded since April. So, we were surprised in court on Thursday when they told the court they have not received the process. Even the court confirmed to all that it was served on them. So, the prosecution then applied for an adjournment to enable them to go through the process because I gave him an advance copy. However, I know they are looking for an escape route, which I know they cannot get this time because the process is a firework, which I know they cannot challenge. It is very pregnant with so many facts, now we have facts of what transpired when military officers invaded my client’s house and killed over 28 persons there. We have direct facts from the horse’s mouth, from those that were attacked and nearly killed by the military. Within the province of the law, they say Nnamdi Kanu has jumped bail, but that is not the case. The case in court cannot be disconnected from the events of 14th of September, 2017 at my client’s house because the moment he was granted bail by the Federal High Court and a date was fixed for trial, he expressed his readiness to face the trials. And the government is fully aware that they cannot establish those ridiculous charges against him. That I believe prompted the invasion of his premises because the target was just to get him, that’s all. They tried to get him in court, but they know they have no case against him in court. So, they now have to find a way of getting at him extra-judicially.

But the military said they moved to arrest Nnamdi Kanu because the Operation Python revealed criminal activities happening at that axis. Why do you disbelieve this?

The intendment of those that invaded his premises was not to arrest him. If the intention was to arrest him they would have waited for him to come to court on October 17, 2017, when the matter was coming up. And before then Nnamdi Kanu has expressed intention to come to court with over two million followers who were all ready to come to court with him on that day. So, if he has the intention of not coming to court, you wouldn’t have been seeing him in public. The military’s plan was to eliminate him. In the circumstance, I mentioned to the court that my client was very ready to come to court and defend his case, but in this circumstance, his safety cannot be guaranteed. If not by the act of providence, he would have been a dead man by now. So, the same government prosecuting him is the same people looking for a way to kill him. Apparently, his life is in danger and once he sets foot in this country, the government would kill him. This is a government that has no respect for the rule of law, a government that is lawless in all ramifications so they can do and undo. So, until there’s a strong indication on the ground that his safety is guaranteed which I know cannot happen under this administration. What we’re concerned now is for the court to investigate the incident of 14th September 2017. That is very fundamental. The circumstance is justifiable for him to disappear because the law says ‘it is only a person that’s alive that can face trial. A dead man cannot face trial’. If he had been killed on the onslaught we wouldn’t have been talking about trials, and that would bring the trial to extinction.

One of the biggest criticism against the judiciary is that they seem to have been pocketed by the other arms of government. How confident are you to get fair hearing in this case?

What I know is that at all times I should be guided by ethics, and also the rules of practice. I still have a modicum of respect for the judge handling our matter, but what you are saying is not out of place. What has been playing out in the judiciary is a matter of public knowledge. At some point, a CJN was unceremoniously removed and some other person was brought in. It is not in doubt that the judiciary has to some extent been compromised. A few days ago I spoke on what’s happening at Kogi State. The serious pervasion of the rule of law, and the rascality on the part of both the House of Assembly and the judiciary. A person was mandated by an arm of government to set up a committee to investigate somebody accused of committing an impeachable offense. Then the CJ with due respect to him and his office, set up a committee in his wisdom, made up of people with impeccable character. The committee looked into the allegations made against the person and exonerated him in all the allegations. When that was done, it is elementary and implied that the committee would have gotten back to the CJ on their findings before writing the House of Assembly. The House of Assembly saw the report of the committee, threw it out, and on their own embarked on a rascality that I cannot explain what informed it. I am not worried about that because I know the political situation in the country, so governor, political appointees or anyone can manipulate the House of Assembly. So, the House of Assembly threw caution to the wind and proceeded in clear violation of the constitution, under Section 118 of the Constitution which is very clear on what to be done when a deputy governor or office holder  singled out for impeachment was exonerated by the report, the House of Assembly threw caution to the wind and went on to impeach him. I have no problem with that because they are rascals and they can do anything they want. But where I have a problem is the fact that the same honourable CJ who set up this committee that investigated and exonerated him from all the allegations against him, now presented himself back to swear in another person as deputy governor. That is where I have a problem. So, to some extent, I can say the system has suppressed the judiciary. But as far as I’m concerned I believe I have immense respect for Justice Binta Nyako. I must say that to you. And I don’t think she will go outside because we are at all times alert, watching the proceedings and following the dictates of the law.

Some traditional leaders recently made a plea to President Muhammadu Buhari to grant amnesty to Nnamdi Kanu to allow him to come home to bury his mother; do you support such a request?

I can assure you those people are on their own frolic. They are on their own political aggrandizement. They have never had Nnamdi Kanu’s mandate to go on such appeal. Nnamdi Kanu would come back at an appropriate time, I can assure of that. So, if the circumstance permits him to be present during his mother’s burial then he’ll be there. Be firmly assured at this time, that Nnamdi Kanu did not delegate anyone to beg the president or governor or anybody. I can confirm that to you authoritatively.

CREDIT: The Sun News

The Biafra Times

Contact us: [email protected]

Twitter:  @BiafraWriters

Instagram: biafrawriters

Publisher: Charles Opanwa

IPOB Trial: Presiding judge breaks down, not stable health wise; adjourns case till October 31

• As IPOB lawyer faults prosecution for setback in the trial

June 18, 2019

By Chikwas Onu Ikpe
For Biafra Writers

In the ongoing trial of the leader of the Indigenous People Of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, and his co-defendants, the trial Justice Binta Nyako (Mrs) of the Federal High Court Abuja delayed hearing till October 31, 2019, following her inability to preside the case and/or indisposed health status.

Owing to the information made available at the court, the judge stressed on her ailing (sick) condition as being an impediment towards today's proceedings.

Recall that on the last adjourned date, the court had slated today (Tuesday) to progress the suit filed against the IPOB's leader, Nnamdi Kanu, in his absence; and severally, the other four other defendants.

Nevertheless, the lead counsel to the defendants, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, reacting to the development, confirmed the sickly condition of the judge, saying that she is obviously, seriously ‘down,’ and indisposed; and could not entertain any matter on her desk.

Reacting to the advancement of the case, Ejiofor said that his clients are always ready, but the prosecution.

According to him, “The federal government of Nigeria is not ready to prosecute this matter because there is nothing before the court in the first place. They cannot prosecute the case in a vacuum.

“As fundamental as our application is, urging the court to vacate the bench warrant issued against our client, the state would have countered it if they had any matter to present, but they did not file any counter affidavit to that effect. That will show you they are not serious.

“We have promptly addressed the court via applications, with furnished facts lying on documents that are very overwhelming, convincing the court to vacate that (bench warrant) order because we are talking about what led to the inability of our client [Nnamdi Kanu] to present himself in court for trial. The fact is in public domain, and the world is aware.

“We have supplied the court with shreds of evidence of what transpired in his house on September 14, 2017, how his house was invaded by the military, and also how he was able to get to where he is today.”

Also, the defence counsel shedded light on the application seeking the adoption of written addresses bothering the ‘trial within trial’ of the other (quartet) defendants.

“Most importantly,” Ejiofor pointed out a pending application challenging the qualification of the charges, outrightly. Same, he said, “is overripe for hearing.” He, therefore, insisted that on the next adjourned date, the court shall foremost hear the pending application prior to the suit.

Like us on facebook.com/biafrawriterspress

Contact us: [email protected]

Twitter:  @BiafraWriters

Publisher: Charles Opanwa

BIAFRA: [COURT UPDATE]: COURT RESUMES HEARING OF SUIT AGAINST KANU’S CO-DEFENDANTS

March 26, 2019

Chukwuemeka Chimerue and Chikwas Onu Ikpe
[The Biafra Times Correspondents]

The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja had slated today for the commencement of the hearing of the suit filed by the Nigerian government against the four defendants whose trial were separated from that of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu.


Recall that on the last adjourned date, November 14, 2018, the absence of the prosecution witnesses (in court) stalled hearing in the matter. In addition, the presiding Justice Binta Nyako insisted on masking the witnesses made available to profess against the defendants.

Also, before the court are pending applications aligned by the lead counsel of IPOB, 'challenging the competence of the charge on the ground that the shreds of evidence filed in support, did not disclose a 'prima facie' case against the defendants.

To this end, the basis of the trial is pending on the legal applications that is or would be put forward by the defence counsels.

Therefore, we look forward to the sanctity of the judicial process to absorb and effectuate, not without justice, the proceedings of today.


Stay tuned with BIAFRA WRITERS PRESS as we bring you LIVE reports from FHC today.

Follow and like us on our official page, Biafra Writers for more updates.

THE BIAFRA TIMES

Contact us: [email protected]

Twitter: @thebiafratimes, @BiafraWriters

Publisher: Charles Opanwa

Biafra: The rejoiner; "Blame game over Kanu's whereabouts" futile attempt by state sponsored agent exposed

IPOB Press release | Published by The Biafra Times

July 29, 2018

Our attention has been drawn to a publication in the Leadership newspapers online news titled "Blame game over Kanu's whereabouts" published on July 26, 2018, which can be accessed via the link https://leadership.ng/2018/07/26/biafra-blame-game-over-kanus-whereabout/

This article was credited to one Kunle Olasanmi. A cursory glance at the publication reveals the dark motives of the author, who to all intent and purposes is an agent of the state. His expositions as conveyed, calls for serious caution and commensurate alert on the part of the public that they might not be misled.

It is a matter of common knowledge,  backed by quantum and incontrovertible photographic and video evidence, that the murderous military invasion of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu's (leader of Indigenous People of Biafra) home on the 14th day of September 2017 and his abduction therein by the invading soldiers was an occurrence which the international community and responsible human rights bodies, such as Amnesty International had severally indicted the Nigerian military.

The Nigerian army's involvement in the invasion and massacre of defenceless and unarmed members of IPOB present in Afaraukwu on that fateful day of 14 September 2017 is the irreducible and constant critical point of reference in any discussions regarding the whereabouts of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

READ ALSO: Buhari regime not different from any other brutal anti-democratic dictatorship - IPOB

It will be fair to say the warped views expressed by this Kunle in this newspaper publication is mischievous and deceitful, aimed at misleading the public. Such calculated attempt to rewrite history and absolve a culpable Nigerian state of their complicity in the disappearance of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu must obviously enjoy the funding/sponsorship of the state.

The subliminal message being conveyed by this vicious author, is that plans are at advanced stages for another possible military invasion of the South East and parts of South-South. We envisage another extra-judicial murderous attack on the homes of Nnamdi Kanu's co-defendant that were only recently granted bail after spending three years in prison custody for a crime that does not yet exist.

Needless to emphasize that Justice Binta Nyako had, pursuant to the application made in open court by IPOB lawyers, placed a ban on any form of threat or invasion of Nnamdi Kanu's co-defendants' homes. The judge ordered that no security personnel should disturb the peace of Benjamin Madubugwu, Bright Chimezie, David Nwawuisi and Chidiebere Onwudiwe.
Kunle's futile attempt to ignore this version of the order again reveals his true motives and gave his article away as a ploy by the Fulani-controlled DSS and military to launch another murderous invasion of Biafraland.

The essence of this rejoinder is to put the record straight and correct the carefully packaged lies being sold to the gullible public by this mercenary going by the name Kunle. Most importantly, we are obliged to put the international community on alert about this latest plan by the Buhari regime to disrupt the peace in both South East and South South. Should anything untoward happen to Nnamdi Kanu’s co-defendants, this Buhari regime must be held accountable for it. Let the Government refrain from any act that may jeopardise the bail granted to the four innocent Biafrans.

We continue to demand the military produce Nnamdi Kanu wherever he is being kept. The federal government of Nigeria is yet to formally respond to numerous queries from the British government demanding an explanation on the whereabouts of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu their citizen. Only time will tell how long this macabre dance will last.



COMRADE EMMA POWERFUL  MEDIA AND PUBLICITY SECRETARY FOR IPOB.

THE BIAFRA TIMES 2018

Contact us: [email protected]

Follow us onTwitter: @thebiafratimes           

Like our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/thebiafratimes

Biafra: Excess Biafrans Make Excess Sureties For IPOB Members On Bail, Reasons Biafrans Should Not Be Dared

By Eluwa Chidiebere Chinazu | For Biafra Writers

July 1, 2018

Prior to the stringent conditions attached to the bail of four members of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, the Nigerian government has been holding their horses to see whether the defendants would be abandoned by their people to languish in prison like orphans due to their perceived inflicted fear of who to stand in for them as sureties after witnessing the horrible persecution and human rights abuse of Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, first surety to the IPOB leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, passed through in the hands of the Nigerian security personnel. But contrary to their intentions, many Biafrans, more than the actual number of sureties required, stormed the court on Wednesday, June 27, 2018, to append their signatures to effect the bail conditions of the quartet defendants that members who came in excess were asked to standby.

This situation, l believe, will put to rest the mindless witch hunting and policing of politicians who are being accused of funding the activities of IPOB. A global organisation like IPOB as severally stated, cannot be funded by an individual. IPOB is a unique freedom fighting outfit substantiated with people of integrity and supported by Biafrans both at home and diaspora. This futile accusations from the Nigerian government employed in diverting the attention of the public from their corrupt practices such as the N30 billion budget fraud perpetrated by the President Muhammadu Buhari-led administration is a typical example.

READ ALSO: Bombing of Nwodo's home: Police, DSS and Ohanaeze are hell-bent to tarnish our image - IPOB

This act has also brought the doggedness and bravery of Biafrans to bear. The East should be feared, I must say. During the Biafra war, only a handful supported the cause and it lingered to three years. As a result of the deliberate marginalization of the Biafrans that didn't end with the war, they were conditioned to buying and selling. It is still with the same skills they acquired in buying and selling that they will utilise to sell Nigeria out through their freedom.
The game is over for Nigeria. Now, Biafrans are poised for the final journey towards freedom and nothing can stop them. Really, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu has awakened many and also restored the dignity of the Biafran race to what they were known for. Imagine a united Biafra against Nigeria.


The Biafra Times
Edited By Chukwuemeka Chimerue

PERFECTION OF THE BAIL CONDITIONS OF NNAMDI KANU'S CO-DEFENDANTS, ON THE FINAL STAGE

June 27, 2018

At the Federal High Court, Abuja, barely 48 hours sequel to the bail grant of Nnamdi Kanu's Co-defendants, hardcore IPOB family members trooped down (in excess) to apply for the suretyship of the quartet defendants, Bright Chimezie, Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Benjamin Madubugwu, and David Nwawuisi, respectively. All of whom were released, on bail, from pre-trial detention.

All formal procedures are sequentially being notarized and subscribed.  We are now on the consummation of the bail bond(s) - the financial responsibility.

STAY TUNED FOR MORE DETAILS

Chukwuemeka M Chimerue  and Chikwas Onu Ikpe
[The Biafra Times Correspondents]

Biafra: Court orders FG to serve legal processes on Kanu’s sureties

•SSS, not an extension of the court, I didn’t issue any order for Abaribe’s arrest, says judge

By Chukwuemeka Chimerue, Chief Editor & Chikwas Onu Ikpe


June 26, 2018

ABUJA - An Abuja Division of the Federal High Court has on Tuesday, directed the Attorney General of the Federation, AGF, to serve court processes to the three sureties to leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, for them to show cause or file response against the forfeiture of their bail bonds.

The presiding Justice Binta Nyako made the ruling following an objection moved by Aloy Ejimakor, lawyer to the second surety, Immanu-El Shalom Oka-Ben Madu, challenging the jurisdiction of the court to order the sureties to show cause and also to give them time to respond to the processes.

According to Ejimakor, “The application on behalf of the second surety was filed and served yesterday. We filed and succeeded in serving the AGF yesterday and all party opponent. That application is challenging the jurisdiction of this Honourable court with the order to show cause on some of the grounds enunciated by the learned colleague.”

Counsel to Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, Chukwuma Maduchukwu Umeh, SAN, in his reaction, also aligned himself to the preliminary objection of the second surety.

READ ALSO: Victory for Nnamdi Kanu & IPOB as Court orders FG to respond to surety’s motion

Ruling in favour of the sureties, the judge, however, expressed dissatisfaction on the perceived lull while accusing the defence lawyers to the sureties of deliberate attempt to delay the progress of the case.

“Yes, it is your right but I want to say that the antics of the counsels in this matter will not be tolerated. This matter was adjourned as far back as March; you waited until yesterday to file processes so that you can truncate the proceedings in this matter.

“But unfortunately for you, some people who also think that they are as smart as you are have arrested one of your clients (Abaribe). If you want to continue to delay the time in this matter, I will help you to delay it. However, I’ll give you your right to reply but am going to give you a date after vacation,” the judge stated.

Meanwhile, Abaribe’s lawyer, Mr Umeh, in a motion, brought to the attention of the court the arrest and persecution of his client by the State Security Service, SSS, asking the court to declare that he be set free.

“Your Lordship, I need to bring to the attention of the court (that) the first surety is here but he’s here in chains because of his role in this case. He only came here by the grace of the office of the Director-General of the SSS who arrested, detained and kept him incommunicado until this morning he was expected to come for this proceeding after which he will go back.

“We need to bring to the attention of the court that the surety who did what the court ask him to do is arrested and detained.
“Your Lordship, I think it has to do with the issue of IPOB; the issue of standing as the surety of the accused person,” he stated.

However, in a swift reaction, the judge explained that Abaribe’s alleged arrest has nothing to do with her, adding that she has not ordered anybody to arrest the Senator.

READ MORE: DSS disregard for the rule of law a norm under Buhari's government

According to the judge, “This has nothing to do with me. His being arrested has nothing to do with this case.

“How did you know (that his arrest is connected to this case)? I did not make any order for his arrest. SSS is not an extension of the court. So, it had nothing to do with me. Whether or not he had been arrested, with or without justification, you know what to do. So don’t bring the drama into this case.”

Subsequently, the case was adjourned till November 14, 2018, for continued hearing.

The Biafra Times 2018
Contact us: [email protected]

IPOB Trial: Court grants bail to Kanu’s co-defendants with stringent conditions

•Says they must be allowed to enjoy their bail


By Chukwuemeka Chimerue, Chief Editor & Chikwas Onu Ikpe | The Biafra Times


June 25, 2018

ABUJA— A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja Monday, granted bail to four detained members of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, standing trial alongside their leader, Nnamdi Kanu, on treasonable felony charges.

Trial Justice Binta Nyako while delivering ruling on the bail applications held that there was no objection filed by the Prosecution in respect to their applications.

The court while granting them bail also put into consideration the period of time they have already spent in prison custody, and their deteriorating health conditions, since 2016 when they were arrested and arraigned to court.

According to the judge, “I have heard all the affidavits in support of the applications, and I have not seen any response opposing them.

“However, I have decided to look at the grant vis-á-vis the charge, and the term of imprisonment bordering on the same and also the time spent in custody. Each of the four defendants have been in custody for almost three years.

READ ALSO: IPOB SPIT FIRE, GIVES FG 48HRS TO RELEASE SENATOR ABARIBE

“The second and third count charge which is levelled against the second and third defendants respectively carries a punishment of five years on conviction while the first count which affects all the four defendants carries a punishment of seven years on conviction.

“I have also been kept abreast with the medical condition of the 3rd defendant. I have also read the judgement of my learned colleague, Ojukwu Ijeoma, under the provision of the Federal High Court Uyo; which granted bail to the 1st defendant.

“I have also read Section 162 of the ACJA which validates the grant of bail to suspects in capital and non-capital offences.

“Taking all these into consideration, I have not seen why, at this stage, I should not grant bail to the defendants.

“Consequently, I hereby grant each of the defendants' bail, pending on the conditions that would follow suit.”

The court, however, listed a series of stringent conditions attached to their bail which it said the defendants must jealously abide in or risk the revocation of their bail.

“The sum of 10 million naira should be deposited to the account of the chief registrar by each defendant with two sureties each with like sum and each of them must deposit their international travel documents (passports) to the court and must not travel out of the country without the permission of the court,” it stated.

Other bail conditions includes that the defendants “should not be seen participating in rallies, gatherings, or granting press interviews. According to the judge, “no 'oyoyo' welcome gathering should be entertained pending when the trial is concluded, they must report every two weeks to their state commissioners of police.

According to the ruling, the first defendant, Bright Chimezie is to report to the Rivers State commissioner of police, the second and fourth defendants, Chidiebere Onwudiwe and David Nwawuisi, respectively, should report to the Enugu State Police commissioner while the third defendant, Benjamin Madubugwu will report to the Anambra State commissioner of police.
Stressing on the need to respect the bail conditions, the court further warned that violating or floating any of the conditions would warrant it to issue an order to the police for their re-arrest and detention to Kuje prisons of which they would not be granted bail till the end of the trial.

It added that “the defendants are under the custody of the court and they must be allowed to enjoy their bail.”

The judge also obliged them time to perfect the financial terms of their bail bonds while the defendants go home but under some conditions which was not stated by the court.

The court also ruled that the personal belongings of the defendants confiscated during their arrest will remain in custody till the end of the trial.

It thereafter, adjourned the case, for continued trial, to November 14, 2018.

The Biafra Times 2018
Contact us: [email protected]

BIAFRA: [COURT UPDATE]: COURT TO RULE ON BAIL APPLICATIONS OF DETAINED IPOB ACTIVISTS

June 25, 2018

Chukwuemeka Chimerue and Chikwas Onu Ikpe
[The Biafra Times Correspondents]

Today had been inscribed for the final ruling on the bail applications of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th defendants, filed by Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor–led IPOB legal team; following the upshot of the amended charges and a "not guilty" plea entered by the quartet defendants.

It is important to take into account that Bright Chimezie, the 1st defendant in the amended charges had been granted bail by the Federal High Court, dated May, 24, 2017, which it directed an "immediate release" of Bright Chimezie from detention and a compensation fine of five million Naira to the same. That ruling from Federal High Court, Uyo,  is till today, still subsisting.  Nevertheless, the government agency, Department of State Security Services, DSS, which apprehended him brazenly flaunted the positive orders of the court.

Nonetheless, he [Bright Chimezie] he is facing trials with the other three defendants at the Federal High Court Abuja, in an amended three-count charge.
Similarly, the other three defendants, Benjamin Madubugwu, David Nwawuisi, and Chidiebere Onwudiwe are being remanded in prison custody for almost three years, owing to the lack of ingredients that borders on the "phantom" and "frivolous" charges slammed against them; and thereupon have no argument to have appeared before the court.

Also, before the court are pending applications aligned by the lead counsel of IPOB, 'challenging the competence of the charge on the ground that the shreds of evidence filed in support of the charge do not disclose a 'prima facie' case against the defendants.

Recall that at the last adjourned date, May 30, 2018, the court foreclosed the Prosecution from further response(s) in relation to the bail applications, owing to the overdue quiescence on the part of the Prosecution.

Therefore, the basis of the trial is pending on the legal applications that is or would be put forward by the defence counsels.

Therefore, we look forward to the sanctity of the judicial process to absorb and effectuate, not without justice, the bail cum release of these activists.


Stay tuned with BIAFRA WRITERS PRESS as we bring you LIVE reports from FHC today.

Follow and like us on our official page, The Biafra Times for more updates.

IPOB Trial: Court forecloses FG’s response to bail applications of Kanu’s co-defendants

•Fixes June 25 for final ruling on application

By Chukwuemeka Chimerue, Chief Editor, & Chikwas Onu Ikpe | The Biafra Times

May 30, 2018

ABUJA - An Abuja Division of the Federal High Court Wednesday, foreclosed further chances for the federal government’s counsel, Shuaibu Labaran, to file responses against the bail applications moved by co-defendants to the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu.

The presiding Justice Binta Nyako made the ruling against the backdrop of the absence of federal government’s prosecution counsel in today’s proceedings and his failure to file any response since April 13, 2018, when the bail applications were filed on behalf of the four detained Biafra activists.

In his reaction on the absence of the prosecution counsel, the lead counsel to the defendants, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, pleaded the court to consider the lenghty periods the defendants, particularly Benjamin Madubugwu, Chidiebere Onwudiwe and David Nwawuisi has spent in prison custody without granting them bail, adding that their health conditions have deteriorated in prison.

According to him, “My Lord, may I also put before this Honourable Court that aside the ruling of the bail applications, that we also have an application, which in substance is challenging the competence of the charges on the basis that the evidences filed before the court lacks 'prima facie'.

“I understand from the last proceedings, the Lordship directed that this application would be heard today; and the said application has also been served on the Prosecution but up till now, they have not responded. The Lord also slated the bail application of the 1st defendant for ruling today but I'm beginning to observe that the ruling is not ready.

“In the course of adjournment for ruling, by the Lordship (which we have not objected), the court should take into account the length of time the defendants have spent in custody, particularly the 2nd defendant, and the 3rd defendant who has been ill for so long. The fact that there is no counter affidavit challenging this application...”

However, the trial judge who retorted in response to Ejiofor said, “Do you know what? The way you people are going in this matter, is that you all like the sound of your voices. I have said I'm adjourning this matter for the ruling of the bail applications; what more do you want? I’m fore-closing any reply from the Prosecution, to rule on your bail applications.

“You gave me lengthy proposals. You gave me lengthy write-ups. I need to look at them. Or you think I should sit here and grant your bail applications? Mr Efere addressed me orally; he did not even file a written bail application.

“I have just said I’m going to foreclose the Prosecution from any reply because they have not filed any. Do you want me to adjourn the ruling to the end of the case? If not, sit down and allow me time to go and look at what you have said.

“I’m going to adjourn all those applications for ruling, and foreclose his reply.”

Consequently, the court was adjourned till June 25, 2018, for ruling on the bail applications and continuation of trial.

Earlier during the opening session of the court, Eric Efere, counsel to the second defendant, Chidiebere Onwudiwe, in the trial, expressed dissatisfaction at the absence of the prosecution counsel, urging the court to go ahead with its ruling on the bail applications regardless of Labaran’s absence.

“My Lord, we are deeply concerned by the purported letter sent by the Prosecution, asking for an adjournment. And I intend to oppose that application as it is frivolous and time wasting. We are aware of the fact that the Ministry of Justice under the Attorney General’s office has a lot of lawyers, and quite competent to have someone else (in representation) in such circumstances,” he stated.

The Biafra Times

IPOB Bail Application: Prosecution counsel absent, asks court to adjourn case till June 7

•As IPOB lawyers kicks, insists on judgment delivery

By Chukwuemeka Chimerue, Chief Editor & Chikwas Ikpe Onu, For Biafra Writers

May 30, 2018


ABUJA - Shuaibu M. Labaran, the Prosecution counsel to the federal government in the ongoing trial of four detained members of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, at the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, today, moved a motion for adjournment, following his absence in court.

According to information made available at the court, Labaran was praying the court to adjourn till 7th day of June, 2018 for continued hearing, saying he has being engaged on other official matters.

The court which slated today (Wednesday) to deliver its ruling on the bail application of the four detained Biafra activists, had hitherto adjourned it against the initial date of May 21, 2018.

However, reacting to the development, lawyer to the fourth defendant, Mr. Maxwell Okpara berated the prosecution's absence and move for adjournment, saying that he(Labaran) was duly informed and assented his readiness when the new date for the hearing was fixed.

He added that he felt something sinister in the offing and a deliberate ploy to truncate Wednesday's proceedings because according to him, the prosecution has several lawyers in their team that could eadily represent them in thr case even when the lead counsel could not make it to court.

He, therefore, insisted that if the court would entertain Labaran's motion for adjournment, it has to grant the reliefs sought by the defendants in their applications before adopting motion for adjournment.


Reporting live from FHC, Abuja.

More details later....

The Biafra Times

BIAFRA: [COURT UPDATE]: COURT HEARS BAIL APPLICATION OF DETAINED IPOB ACTIVISTS

The Biafra Times | April 13, 2018

In the act of making headway to a Division of the Federal High Court in Abuja, today, being the rescheduled day inscribed for hearing the bail application of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th defendants, filed by Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor–led legal team of IPOB;  following the upshot of the amended charges and a "not guilty" plea entered by the quartet defendants.

It is exigent to note that Bright Chimezie, the 1st defendant in the amended charges had been granted bail by the Federal High Court, dated May, 24, 2017, which it directed an "immediate release" of Bright Chimezie from detention and a compensation fine of five million Naira to the same. Nevertheless, the Department of State Security Services, whom apprehended him brazenly flaunted the positive orders of the court.

Howbeit, he [Bright Chimezie] has been re–arraigned and adjoined to face trials with the three other defendants at the Federal High Court Abuja, in an amended three-count charge.

Similarly, the three other defendants, Benjamin Madubugwu, David Nwawuisi, and Chidiebere Onwudiwe are being remanded in prison custody for almost three years, owing to the lack of ingredients that boarders on the "phantom" and "frivolous" charges slanted against them; and thereupon have no argument to have appeared before the court.

Also, before the court are pending applications aligned by the lead counsel of IPOB, 'challenging the Juries of the court to hear the suit' coming up for the bail grant.

Hence, we look forward to the sanctity of the judicial process to absorb and effectuate the bail cum release of these activists.


Stay tuned with BIAFRA WRITERS PRESS as we bring you LIVE reports from FHC today.

By Chikwas Onu Ikpe
[The Biafra Times Correspondent]