Connect with us

NATIONAL NEWS

IPOB Condemns Appeal Court Ruling Upholding Proscription As ‘Rape Of Justice’

Published

on

Ipob

Abuja, Nigeria – The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has strongly condemned the Appeal Court’s decision to uphold the group’s proscription, describing it as a “rape of justice” and a flagrant disregard for Nigerian law.

In a press release issued by Comrade Emma Powerful, IPOB’s Media and Publicity Secretary, the movement accused Abuja courts of being influenced by “haters of IPOB” and purposefully undermining the rule of law.

Advertisement

Powerful argued that the initial ex-parte order, which banned IPOB nearly eight years ago, was a temporary measure that went beyond the legally mandated 14-day limit.

He also criticised the court’s reliance on the alleged threat to national security as justification for the proscription, claiming that no state of emergency had been declared and no public disorder attributed to IPOB existed to justify such action.

Advertisement

The press release emphasised several legal irregularities:

Violation of Due Process: IPOB claims that an ex-parte order cannot impose criminal liability, despite the fact that this was the basis for the initial proscription.

Advertisement

Lack of Presidential Authorisation: The proscription order, signed by the late Abba Kyari, President Buhari’s Chief of Staff, lacked the legally required signatures of the President and his Vice President, Yemi Osinbajo.

According to Powerful, Kyari and former Attorney General Abubakar Malami made a deliberate attempt to circumvent proper procedures.

Advertisement

Ignoring the Constitutional Mandate: The IPOB claims that the Appeal Court’s decision prioritises a flawed piece of legislation over the supreme law of the land, the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of association.

Powerful accused Fulani judges of bias, claiming a pattern of disregarding the rule of law in IPOB-related cases.

Advertisement

He criticises the use of a separate case (Asari Dokubo’s bail application) to justify the threat to national security claim, and he questions the shift from a threat to national security claim based on Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s public appearances to labelling IPOB as a terrorist organisation in the absence of evidence of terrorist activity.

The press release concludes by reiterating IPOB’s intention to challenge the Appeal Court’s decision through legal means, vowing to sue anyone who refers to IPOB as a proscribed organisation without sufficient evidence of terrorist activity.

Advertisement

The movement continues to pursue self-determination through legal channels.

Advertisement

We are committed to providing high-quality news content on a wide range of topics, including the most recent economic and business updates, politics, entertainment, and compelling human interest stories.

Trending