IPOB suffers another defeat as court refuses to order Buratai to produce ‘missing’ Kanu

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) on Friday had its suit seeking the Abuja Federal High Court to order the Chief of Army Staff, Lt.-Gen. Tukur Buratai, to produce its ‘missing’ leader Nnamdi Kanu declined.
This is coming barely a week after an Abuja High Court presided over by Justice Abdul Kafarati, also declined the group’s application praying for the annulment of the order of the court that proscribed and tagged it a terrorist organisation.
Kanu’s whereabouts has remained unknown after soldiers under “Operation Python Dance 11” of the Nigerian Army allegedly invaded the home of the IPOB leader in September last year.
IPOB team of lawyers led by Mr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor, had consequently in an application filed before Justice Binta Nyako, prayed the court to compel Buratai to produce the IPOB leader either dead or alive.
However, delivering judgment in the matter on Friday, Justice Nyako dismissed the application on the grounds that counsel to Kanu was unable to convince the court that the IPOB leader was seen with soldiers at any time.
Ejiofor had told the trial judge that he had neither seen nor heard from their client since September 14, 2017, when the Nigerian Army invaded his house “on a murderous raid, where life and mortar bullets were fired on unarmed and defenseless populace, leaving 28 persons dead and abducting many”.
He had pursuant to section 40 of the Federal High Court Act, F12, LFN 2005 and section 6(6) (1) (4) of the 1999 constitution, as amended, applied for “an order of Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum, commanding the Respondent (Buratai), to produce the Applicant in Court”.
Buratai meanwhile, in a counter-affidavit, told the court that Kanu was never in custody of the Nigeria Army, insisting that soldiers who were deployed to the South-East for ‘Operation Python Dance II, did not have any contact whatsoever with Kanu on September 12 or 14, or anytime thereafter as alleged.
According to Buratai, the Nigerian Army did not at any time arrest or take Kanu into custody within the period the military operation lasted, even as he denied allegations that soldiers invaded the IPOB leader’s house in Afara-Ukwu Ibeku, Umuahia, Abia State.
A colonel attached to the Chief of Army’s office, Army Headquarters, Abuja, Col. A.A Yusuf, who deposed to the counter-affidavit on behalf of Buratai, further claimed that the alleged invasion of Kanu’s house was totally false.
Buratai explained to the court that his men during the operation only pursued a truck allegedly laden with arms and explosives of different kinds, into a compound that they later found to belong to Kanu and his father.
Justice Nyako held in her ruling on the matter, “The doctrine of last seen”, which the applicant relied upon, even though applicable in murder cases, has no statutory backing. Besides, the Judge noted that Kanu was listed in the suit as the main applicant.
Justice Nyako further said that she was surprised that someone that was said to be missing was the one seeking reliefs from the court, adding that the lawyers ought to have rather commenced the action “in the name of applicant”.
She said, “Has the applicant placed enough evidence to show that the respondent was the last to see the applicant? Was there any evidence that he was last seen with even one soldier? The onus of proof will not shift from the applicant to the respondent except the applicant is able to prove that he was last seen by the respondent. This they have failed to do.
READ ALSO: AGF queries Magu over probe of 1.1bn Malabu oil scam, demands explanation
“This application fails and it is hereby dismissed. Be ready for your case”, the Judge held.
Immediately the ruling was delivered, Ejiofor demanded to know from the court what the next line of action would be in respect of Kanu’s pending trial, since his whereabouts has remained unknown. Replying Ejiofor, Justice Nyako said: “As far as I am concerned, the applicant is on bail. Was he not released on bail based on an undertaking by sureties?
“The sureties guaranteed to produce the applicant in court for his trial, so three of them should produce him. They made an undertaking and deposed to the fact that they will produce him to stand trial.
“If there is any reason they cannot produce him, they should tell me on that date.”
Earlier, she had slated February 20 for continuation on the trial.
Kanu and four other pro-Biafra agitators, Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Benjamin Madubugwu, David Nwawuisi and Bright Chimezie are facing a five-count treasonable felony charge preferred against them by the Federal Government.
On October 17, 2017, following Kanu’s disappearance, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, a Jewish High Priest, Emmanu El- Salom Oka BenMadu, and an accountant, Tochukwu Uchendu, who were sureties to Kanu were asked to produce him or face jail term/forfeiture of N100 million they each deposited as bail bond.
Meanwhile, Sen Abaribe is praying the court to discharge him from the matter because he no longer has the capacity to produce the defendant for continuation of his trial.

 

RipplesNigeria… without borders, without fears

Click here to join the Ripples Nigeria WhatsApp group for latest updates.

Join the conversation

Opinions

Support Ripples Nigeria, hold up solutions journalism

Balanced, fearless journalism driven by data comes at huge financial costs.

As a media platform, we hold leadership accountable and will not trade the right to press freedom and free speech for a piece of cake.

If you like what we do, and are ready to uphold solutions journalism, kindly donate to the Ripples Nigeria cause.

Your support would help to ensure that citizens and institutions continue to have free access to credible and reliable information for societal development.

Donate Now