The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Biafra

  • Biafra: Kanu, others rearraigned before third judge

    Biafra: Kanu, others rearraigned before third judge

    •Court to hear bail application Nov 17

    After about a year in custody, the trial of pro-Biafra agitator Nnamdi Kanu and some of his associates commenced afresh yesterday before the third judge of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

    Kanu, leader of Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), the group’s National Coordinator, Chidiebere Onwudiwe, Benjamin Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi were arraigned yesterday before Justice Binta Nyako on an 11-count amended charge filed by the Federal Government.

    They were charged with comprising terrorism, treasonable felony, managing an unlawful society, publication of defamatory matter, illegal possession of firearms and improper importation of goods. The charge is marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015.

    Kanu and two other (excluding Onwudiwe) were initially taken before Justice Ahmed Mohammed (of the Federal High Court, Abuja) in December last year, but Kanu rejected the judge, accusing him of lacking the capacity to do justice in the case.

    Justice Mohammed withdrew from the case, following which it was reassigned to Justice John Tsoho (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja).

    Before trial could commence, Kanu’s lawyer Chuks Muoma (SAN), wrote petition against Justice Tsoho, to the National Judicial Council (NJC) accusing him (the judge) of bias.

    At the last proceedings before Justice Tsoho on September 26, 2016, Muoma drew the court’s attention to his application for the judge to withdraw from the case, alleging that he was biased in the way he was handling the case.

    The lawyer said his client had also petitioned the National Judicial Council (NJC) on the issue. He contended that the best option was for the judge to suspend proceedings in the case pending the NJC’s decision on his client’s petition.

    Muoma told the court that the NJC has acknowledged receipt of the petition and commenced investigation.

    “We are only asking the court to hands off the case. My client has lost confidence in this court. Following the development, all we are asking this court to do is to hands off this case pending the outcome of the NJC Investigation.

    “It would not be proper for the court to continue with this matter when investigation is ongoing. So, in the interest of justice, we are asking the court to hands off the case. I would urge the court to transfer the matter. I will suggest that it be sent back to the CJ.”

    The lawyer accused the judge of acting in line with the suggestion of President Muhammadu Buhari that Kanu was not going to be released under any circumstance.

    Justice Tsoho consequently withdrew from the case, following which it was assigned to Justice Nyako.

    Before Justice Nyako yesterday, Kanu and the three others pleaded not guilty to the 11-count amended charge, which was filed on November 7.

    After their arraignment, prosecution lawyer Magaji Labaran sought an adjournment to enable him react to the bail applications filed for the defendants.

    Defence lawyers did not object to a date to for them to argue their bail applications, following which Justice Nyako adjourned to November 17.

  • Biafra clamour illegal, says minister 

    Biafra clamour illegal, says minister 

    •Igbo leaders: respect Igbo, release Kanu

    Those clamouring for a Republic of Biafra are doing so without the mandate of Igbo people. Besides, they are carrying out an illegal activity, Minister of Foreign Affairs Geoffrey Onyeama said at the weekend

    He advised the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) and the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB) to adopt laid down constitutional and diplomatic processes in their demand, rather than engaging in an illegal approach.

    He said though it was their fundamental right to clamour for Biafra, “they should be rational and not emotional in going about it”.

    Onyeama said there is a democratic structure in Nigeria and there exist the Senate and the House of Representatives “and only your representatives in the National Assembly can raise the issue of referendum regarding the sovereign state of Biafra”.

    Besides, he posited that those leading the agitation “are not speaking for Ndigbo, as they do not have the mandate of the Igbo race to do so.” He urged them to embrace dialogue rather than violence.

    The minister spoke with reporters in Enugu after a stakeholders/caucus meeting of the Enugu State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Onyeama urged those spearheading the breakaway project to critically look at the rules governing secession.

    He called on Nigerians, particularly those from Southeast to keep supporting the Muhammadu Buhari-led APC government, stressing that the administration had the capacity to tackle the challenges facing the nation.

    According to him, the administration is set to address the present economic recession.

    The convener of the meeting and Enugu State chairman of the APC, Dr. Ben Nwoye, assured the national leadership of the APC that the state chapter was highly committed to wresting power from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Enugu State in 2019.

    He said political structures were being oiled and strengthened at all levels in the state and called on true democrats and progressives to embrace the party so as to enthrone a better Enugu state in the next political dispensation.

    Nwoye urged Nigerians to exercise some patience with the Federal Government, as it makes frantic efforts towards stabilising the economy, damaged by the past PDP led administration.

    At the meeting were Special Adviser to President Buhari on Judiciary Reforms Mrs Juliet Ibekaku, Ambassador-designate  Major General Chris Eze, (rtd) and members of the state Working Committee, among others.

    Also at the weekend, Igbo leaders called for the restructuring of the country to give Igbo nation a sense of belonging.

    According to him, Ndigbo have made some of the biggest sacrifices and contributions for the development modern Nigeria and should be given a pride of place to operate freely as equal citizens without discrimination.

    The Igbo leaders also called for the  immediate release of the detained leader of the Independent Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu and others, saying what they are agitating for did not constitute threat to the peace.

    Speaking after a three-day 2016 World Igbo Summit held at the Gregory University, Uturu, Abia State, the leaders condemned the destructive activities of Fulani herdsmen and urged governors and the lawmakers in Igbo states to enact laws prohibiting open grazing in Igbo land.

    They made their position known in a communiqué issued at the end of the summit.

    They urged Ndigbo to take full responsibility for the rebuilding of Igbo economy and development.

    The communiqué, which was signed by Gen. Ike Nwachukwu, Col. Joe Achuzie, Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Chief Francis Ojih, Chief Emmanuel Iwuanyanwu, Prof George Obiozor, Dr Greg Ike Ibe, Iyom Josephine and Dr. Joe Nwaorgu, called on Southeast governors to form a Joint Commission for the development of their areas.

    The communiqué, which was read by Mazi Sam Ohuabunwa, resolved that “since Biafran agitators are no threat to national security, the Federal Government should promptly release Nnamdi Kanu and all other prisoners of conscience in line with the rule of law”.

    “Ndigbo have made the biggest sacrifice and contributions to the building of the modern Nigeria and insist that henceforth will work for a nation where the Igbo are allowed to live and operate as equal citizens without any discrimination, bias or intimidation.”

    “That the 1999 Constitution should be repealed and a new one enacted that will recognise the inalienable right of each constituent group to self-determination and Regional autonomy as enshrined in the 1960 Independence Constitution and 1963 Republican Constitution”.

    “Ndigbo hereby resolve to take full responsibility for the rebuilding of the Igbo economy and development of Ala-Igbo and hereby shall adopt the digital economy as the organising paradigm and implementation framework for the sustainable development of Alaigbo.”

    “That in line with the recent resolution of the Southern Nigerian Peoples Assembly, the National Assembly and State Assemblies should legislate the prohibition of nomadic grazing by herdsmen and the establishment of grazing reserves and ranches with public funds. We therefore call on the National Assembly to oppose the grazing bill in both chambers”.

    “That in view of the threat by the Fulani herdsmen which constitute present and imminent danger to peace and security in Igboland, the Igbo Governors and the States Assemblies should immediately legislate against any form of open grazing in Igbo land”.

    “The South East Governors should establish a Joint Commission for development of Ala-Igbo and be supportive of good Igbo initiatives”.

    “That Igbo Political leadership (elected and appointed) must act in the best interest of Ndiigbo and be prepared to be held accountable by the people for all their actions and inactions”.

    “That the principles of Igbo Social Justice–Akulue uno, Eziokwubundu, Onyeaghana-nwaneya, Igwebuike, Ezi-afaka-ego, Egbe-bere-ugo-bere, Ako n’uche, nwanyi-bu-ife, ntorobia bu-Ike Obodo would be fully applied in our interactions among Ndiigbo and our neighbours”.

    “That the contributions of the NdiIgbo in the Africa, Europe, the Americas, Asia etc, to the achievement of our vision and committed to sharing their aspirations and challenges, is recognized and we encourage them to think home and invest at home”.

  • Biafra: No room for referendum, says Buhari

    Biafra: No room for referendum, says Buhari

    President Muhammadu Buhari has advised Biafra activists to toe the path of democracy by joining a political party to advance their interest within a united Nigeria.

    According to him, a referendum, which some of the agitators are clamouring for, is unlikely.

    The President stated this at the weekend during a news conference in New York to mark the end of his visit to United States for the 71st United Nations’ General Assembly (UNGA).

     “What I see is those who feel strongly about creating a state within Nigeria, rather than joining a party and campaigning. You cannot practice democracy by creating a state within Nigeria,” Buhari said.

    The President also addressed a claim that his nephew, Alhaji Mamman Daura, takes decisions for him on national affairs. He said the rumour was from an online medium.

    “I don’t know where they get that information from. I stood for the election; I visited every local government in Nigeria by air, by road and so on, and was credibly elected. So, whosoever feels like (I’m not the president) he lost somehow. That’s his problem, not my problem,” he said.

    While acknowledging the attention the Bring Back Our Girls (BBOG) campaigners attract to the plight of the missing Chibok girls, the President urged the media to also focus on the plight of those affected by the Boko Haram insurgency.

    He said: “More than 20,000 people were affected by the Boko Haram insurgency. Some are now orphans. Some children don’t even know where their parents are, let alone knowing where they’re from. I think this should get your attention more than the over 200 Chibok girls.

    “Those who took them claim they’re there and alive. It’s a question of negotiating and maybe give them what they want and they’ll release them. We’re negotiating, we’re doing everything we can get them out, so they should be patient.”

    In a statement by the Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina, the President reviewed all his major and side events during the trip and highlighted the issues on which he sent a clear and direct message to world leaders.

    He said: “I mentioned that the plight of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) arising from Boko Haram terrorism is of particular concern to us. For this reason, we have taken concrete steps to address their humanitarian needs and to ensure that necessary conditions are established to enable the voluntary return of the displaced persons to their homes in safety and dignity.”

    While acknowledging that Nigeria as a developing country has been adversely affected by the global economic downturn, he said Nigeria is undeterred and has embarked on a wide range of reforms to diversify the economy and shift emphasis to mining, agriculture, industrialization, infrastructure development and the creation of the enabling environment for Foreign Direct Investment.

    He also noted that fighting corruption remained prime importance to his administration.

    The campaign, he said, is already yielding positive gains including significant stolen assets recoveries.

  • Buhari still wrong on Biafra

    Buhari still wrong on Biafra

    WHEN more than a hundred youth corps members visited him in Daura, Katsina State, during the last Sallah break, President Muhammadu Buhari took the opportunity to engage them on the unending controversy of Biafra. Reports of the visit did not indicate that the corps members raised the issue, and indeed could not have, seeing they were not all of Igbo origin. But apparently, the president had thought of making a policy statement relevant to youths, one of which was the agitation for a sovereign state of Biafra. The president’s Daura statement was not the first time he would speak on Biafra, nor the first time in Daura he would put his foot down on the matter. The first time was a gaffe he made when he paid a courtesy visit to the Emir of Daura, during which he suggested that no one could push him (the president) and his people out of Nigeria.
    Last Sallah’s statement before the corpers was this time not a gaffe. It was simply a reiteration of his stubborn and sentimental resolve on the Biafra subject. “I walked on my foot for most of the 30 months that we fought the Nigeria-Biafra civil war, in which at least 2 million Nigerians were killed,” he began testily. “We were made by our leaders to go and fight Biafra not because of money or oil — because oil was not a critical factor then — but because of one Nigeria. So, if leadership at various levels failed, it was not the fault of the rest of Nigerians who have no quarrel with one another. So, please tell your colleagues that we must be together to build this country. It is big enough for us and potentially big enough in terms of resources.”
    The problem now is not whether Biafra agitators are right or wrong. The problem is not even whether President Buhari’s account of his role in the civil war is inspiring or not. Nor whether he made sense or not when he talked about the bigness and ample resources of Nigeria being capable of accommodating everyone. The problem, it seems, is whether appeal to sentiment can obviate the clamour for Biafra; whether forceful statements denouncing Biafra and asserting that the unity of the country was non-negotiable were enough to terminate any thought of Biafra. There are many people who fought for the unity of Nigeria, who even emerged as heroes from the war, but who have decided to add their voices to the need to renegotiate the bases for peaceful co-existence in Nigeria. The president is not superior to them, nor they to him.
    Furthermore, by his repeated references to his role as a soldier during the war, and by insinuating a ‘we versus them’ mentality into the controversy, the president is not helping the Biafra and restructuring discourses at all. He has done nothing, nor appears prepared to do anything, to show his willingness to examine the bases of the Biafra agitation, or any other agitation for that matter. It is not clear how he hopes to settle the matter when he does not give any indication he understands the reasons propelling the Biafra idea. There is nothing wrong with him opposing the idea of secession or of Biafra; but there is everything wrong with the way he has shut his mind from the controversy completely, almost as if he thinks that should push come to shove he could get the country forcefully united behind him against Biafra. It won’t happen.
    Apart from the controversy unfortunately polarising roughly along North-South lines, a deep and dispassionate look at the Biafra matter would easily show that too many things about Nigeria have changed, thereby predisposing the country to the many schisms it is experiencing today. More schisms will arise tomorrow. Rather than adopt a honest and forthright view of the country’s political, social and economic problems, and instead of provoking a visionary and futuristic examination of those problems with a view to anticipating and resolving them, Nigerian leaders have unwisely stuck to the templates of the past and suggested force could always do what reason cannot. They are wrong. And President Buhari is even wronger to keep eschewing reason and dialogue whenever crises such as Biafra agitation and Niger Delta militancy rear their heads.
    Until Nigerian leaders honestly acknowledge that they have failed to build a nation anchored on an idea and identity around which the people can aggregate their various and sometimes conflicting aspirations, Nigerians will continue to gravitate towards their primordial identities with the attendant negative consequences to national unity. Force cannot fill that yawning chasm that has done havoc to the country’s progress and stability. Let President Buhari therefore begin to embrace reason and dialogue, for no amount of sermonising and threat will destroy the idea of Biafra that seems to entice a generation unruffled by the experience of the war.

  • Biafra: IPOB, REIPOB in verbal war

    Biafra: IPOB, REIPOB in verbal war

    The feud between the Nnamdi Kanu-led Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and the factional group, the Re-Formed Indigenous People Of Biafra (RE-IPOB), took a turn for the worse weekend, with RE-IPOB accusing Nnamdi Kanu of not being sincere with the Biafran struggle.

    RE-IPOB said Kanu was merely using the platform to seek fame and fortune.

    But, responding to the allegation, the spokesman of IPOB, Emma Powerful, described RE-IPOB as a faceless group that is being used by the government and politicians to create impressions that there is division in IPOB.

    Aside from the wrangling between the divided group, Kanu’s camp is also enmeshed in serious squabble with the pan Igbo socio-cultural group, Ohanaeze Ndigbo.

    In a statement  signed by the spokesman, Ikemba Biafra,  RE- IPOB  accused Nnamdi Kanu of collecting huge sums of money from local and foreign sources to betray the cause.

    “Apart from this, Nnamdi Kanu was insulting and denigrating respected Biafran and Igbo leaders and converting the Radio Biafra, set up by the MASSOB leadership for his private propaganda machinery. He was also making utterances and statements that led to the death of so many innocent Biafran youths and the detention of many others.”

    Reacting to the allegations, IPOB spokesman, Powerful said: “We the IPOB family members worldwide under Nnamdi Kanu laughed at those claimed RE IPOB and TRIPOB who allowed themselves to be used by the government and unscrupulous politicians in the land to create impressions that there is division in the family of Biafra. We believe the money they collected from the Federal Government and security agents have entered into their pockets.

    “Those groups should be open and disclose their identity.  Who are their fathers and where did they come from? Mazi Nnamdi Kanu come from Afara Ukwu Ibeku in Umuahia Abia State the great son of His Royal Highness Eze Israel Okwu Kanu Of Afara Ibeku Umuahia and operates in all the countries of the world.”

    Powerful accused Ohaneze of  playing the role of misguided servants, adding: “Some of them that owe their political relevance to a Hausa Fulani godfather think that what obtained during the era of 1967-70 when most of them were rewarded with juicy positions in Nigeria for betraying their people still obtains.

    “There is decay at the heart of governance of Ohaneze, and that is why they are viewed largely as a bunch of natural born betrayers who will sell their soul to the devil for a pot of soup. Being considered relevant in the politics of Nigeria is more important to them than the collective survival of their people. Is that how elders should behave?

    “Fulani herdsmen are killing us in Enugu, but instead of addressing this human disaster, they have chosen instead to align with the DSS in the kidnapping of their own children and their concocted non-existent IPOB splinter groups. They should learn from Arewa Consultative Forum and to a large extent, the Afenifere on how to defend one’s national interest in a divisive society like Nigeria.”

    Also, the Ohanaeze Youth Council (OYC), in a statement signed by Mazi Alex Okemiri dissociated itself from IPOB’s allegation.

    “Our attention has been drawn to an allegation that our National President, Mazi Okechukwu Isiguzoro is behind the breakaway faction of IPOB.  This is a naked lie. Ohanaeze Ndigbo Youth council worldwide has nothing to do with Tripob, neither is it involved in the crisis rocking IPOB and therefore want to use this medium to warn Elliot Uko and the spokesperson of IPOB, Clifford Iroanya to stop blackmailing the leadership of our group or risk being declared enemies of Ndigbo.

    “We believe in the restructuring of the country according to 2014 Constitutional Conference and call President Buhari to look into it. We advise IPOB not to involve OYC in their propaganda.”

  • Kanu won’t renounce Biafra, says IPOB

    Kanu won’t renounce Biafra, says IPOB

    The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has condemned the stories credited to Mr Gbomo Jomo and the members of the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) that the IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu is willing to renounce Biafra agitation in exchange for his freedom.

    In a statement by its spokesman Emma Powerful, IPOB said MEND and Gbomo Jomo were among those speaking from both sides of their mouths.

    The statement reads: “The last time, they accused former President Goodluck Jonathan and others of sponsoring the freedom fighters, the Niger Delta Avengers (NDA), the public ignored them.

    “Now, they have turned around to accuse IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu, which shows that the Presidency and the Department of State Service (DSS) paid Gbomo Jomo and

  • Kanu willing to renounce Biafra for freedom, says MEND

    Kanu willing to renounce Biafra for freedom, says MEND

    The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) has said the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, is willing to renounce Biafra in secret in exchange for his freedom.

    The militant group said it (MEND) and the Federal Government rejected what he called Kanu’s “hypocrisy” of remaining defiant in public while accepting to secretly renounce secession from Nigeria.

    in an online statement yesterday through its spokesperson Jomo Gbomo, MEND condemned the alleged provocative and hypocritical statements by IPOB and Kanu, purporting to dissociate themselves from some of the concessions so far secured by the militant group in the dialogue between it and the Federal Government.

    The militant group said the discussions were aimed at resolving the current Niger Delta crisis.

    The statement said: “MEND hereby uses this opportunity to inform the world that following the group’s negotiations with the Federal Government, Nnamdi Kanu has made it clear that he is willing to renounce ‘Biafra’ in secret in exchange for his freedom. MEND and the Federal Government have, however, flatly rejected the IPOB/Kanu hypocrisy to remain defiant in public, while accepting to secretly renounce secession.

    “MEND urges the already frustrated and desperate Mr. Kanu and IPOB to swallow their pride and make a public denunciation of ‘Biafra’ so that the gullible donors and followers, deceived by the illusion of a ‘Biafra Republic’ which aims to annex the Niger Delta region as part of its territory, shall become fully aware that the so-called ‘Biafra Republic’ is merely a business venture and scam whose sole beneficiaries are Kanu, directors of IPOB, their families and cronies.”

    Despite the peace efforts, members of the Niger Delta Avengers (NDA) and other militant groups are still bombing crude oil and gas pipelines as well as other installations of oil companies in the region.

     

  • Kanu can’t renounce Biafra, says MASSOB

    Kanu can’t renounce Biafra, says MASSOB

    Leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB) Nnamdi Kanu cannot renounce his group’s demand for an independent state of Biafra, Movement for the Actualisation of the Soverign State of Biafra (MASSOB) said yesterday.

    A progress report on the dialogue between the Movement for the Emancipation of Niger Delta (MEND) and agents of the Federal Government, at the weekend, said an arrangement was being worked out for Kanu’s release from prison custody by the Federal Government if he renounced his Baifra agitation.

    Last month, President Muhammadu Buhari  said the government through some oil companies and traditional rulers had been talking to the militants to end their agitation and bombing of oil facilities in the Niger Delta.

    But Presidential spokesman Garba Shehu could not confirm MEND’s weekend claim. Shehu said the government had not received the report of the talks from those it authorised to discuss with MEND.

    MASSOB leader Uchenna Madu, in a statement yesterday, described the condition as “laughable and inconsequential.”

    The statement said: “MASSOB does not see Mazi Nnamdi Kanu  as one who can betray his belief on Biafra, he is not a sellout, his ideologies on Biafra may differ, he can never betray hundreds of Biafrans that died recently on the course of Biafra.

    “Secondly, Biafra is not a religious faith that can be renounced or abandoned. Nobody can renounce Biafra, it is an identity, culture, tradition and existence of group of nationalities, it’s not personal or individualistic.

    “There are thousands of Biafranistic persons more determined, consistent, dangerous, focused, unshakable than Nnamdi KANU, Uchenna Madu and other leading figures in the Biafra struggle.

    “Biafra is also bigger than all the leading figures put together.

    It is childish on Federal government to expect Nnamdi Kanu to renounce Biafra, the fate of over fifty million people.

    “MASSOB advises Buhari to save his battered Nigeria’s face from more diplomatic shame by allowing the court to grant Nnamdi Kanu and others bail.

    “We shall continue to press for their release including the ultimate aim of Biafra actualization with non-violence. Nigeria will soon experience another dimension of non-violence struggle that will marvel it.  Soon the world will celebrate the downfall of the most corrupt country.”

    But the Ijaw Youth Council said it is still studying the reported MEND /federal government agreement.

    IYC Spokesman Eric Omare told our reporter in a telephone conversation in Warri last night that the federal government was yet to confirm the veracity of the claims, since it was a party in the said-agreement.

    “We are still watching the development unfold, we will wait till sometime during the week before we speak on the matter.

    “The federal government has not even reacted or confirm the said-agreement so we will study the situation before we talk”, Omare said.

  • VON chief to MASSOB, IPOB: forget Biafra agitation

    The Director-General of the Voice of Nigeria (VON), Osita Okechukwu, at the weekend urged separatist groups to forget their self-actualisation agitation and support President Muhammadu Buhari to rid the country of corruption.

    Okechukwu said he supported the President’s position that if Nigerians failed to kill corruption, it would kill the nation.

    The VON chief noted that ethnic merchants and religious bigots hid under such fault lines to corruptly enrich themselves.

    Okechukwu spoke in Enugu at a reception organised for him and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Geoffrey Onyeama, by their kinsmen, under the aegis of Ekeh Progressives Forum (EPF).

    Among the groups clamouring to breakaway from Nigeria are: the Movement for Actualisation of Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), Niger Delta Avengers and similar new movements.

    Delivering a speech, titled: True Federalism: Panacea or Placebo to Nigeria’s Paralysis? Eke Town as a Case Study, at a dinner part of the reception, the chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) blamed greed and corruption for the inequality in the country.

    Speaking before an audience, which included former Vice President Alex Ekwueme and former Senate President Ken Nnamani, the VON chief recalled that President Buhari, in his 2015 Chatham House speech, described the inequality in the country as the tiny island of the affluent in the ocean of misery.

    Okechukwu said: “Corruption, in all its ramifications, not just the fleecing of the state fund, includes petty human frailties, like jealousy, hate, stereotypes and prejudice. We shall presently return to these two opaque pages of the same epitaph of greed and corruption and commonly misunderstood theme.

    “These two opaque pages may help us to show that ethnicity and religion play less crucial roles in our dysfunction than greed and its grandson, corruption. Ethnicity and religion are more of the tools of scavengers and predators. It would amaze us to look closely at our communities, local council areas and zones. We are most likely to find that they are the victims of the cankerworm called corruption.

  • Biafra Day: Of Separatists and Supremacists

    No sovereign state stands idly by in the face of a challenge to its authority or territorial integrity. It matters little that the challenge may be from just a rabble of youthful agitators with no military prowess, but only sufficient nuisance value to unsettle the public peace; the very thought of a challenge to sovereignty ventures in the dangerous realm of treason and cannot simply be ignored. Matters get not a bit compounded if the agitators take recourse to violence, and in the process claim casualties from among security agents posted on duty ostensibly to avert an escalation of the insurrection temper. Rouge killing of security agents is scarcely tolerated anywhere in the world, and it is a sure invitation to over-handed reprisal – both in instant retribution for the killing, and as a deterrent against reoccurrence.

    These are universal principles, even though evil regimes have applied the same rules in exerting bloody repression of legitimate aspirations by unarmed civilians for freedom or statehood, like the former South African apartheid regime did to black nationalists in the Soweto Massacre of June 1976. Fact remains, however, that the principles are in themselves conscionable and rate high on the moral scale.

    It seems quite obvious that these were the principles at play on Monday, last week, when members of the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra(MASSOB) and the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) marched out in some southern cities to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the secessionist vision of a Biafra republic. The dream republic was, of course, still-birthed on the heels of its proclamation in 1967 by the late Ikemba Odumegwu Ojukwu, kindling a three-year civil war; and it remains effectively so even now. Ordinarily, its remembrance and commemoration within decorous limits should be a legitimate pressure handle for indigenes of the constituent areas to draw the nation’s attention to perceptions of marginalisation that warranted the secessionist declaration in the first place. After all, even with all its imperfections, we are in a constitutional democracy – a dispensation hallmarked by freedom of speech, opinion and association, among others, as the law of the land guarantees.

    But then, reports indicated that the Biafra Day rallies in Onitsha, Owerri, Aba, Enugu, Asaba and other cities across the region last Monday featured wild cat violence, including attacks on security personnel posted on duty to oversight the rallies, erupting like dry fodder in harmattan fire. Most reports cited MASSOB and IPOB activists as overreaching the limits of decorum by a long stretch, thereby eliciting heavy-handed security response that invariably resulted in fatalities. Statistics conflicted as regards the casualty figures – some accounts citing as high as 30 to 40 civilian deaths, which the police eventually disputed. That really is no matter, as the American humorist Evan Esar (1899–1995) once defined statistics as “the science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.” A relevant baseline seems to be that at least five activists were killed in Onitsha, in reprisal for the killing of two policemen. Activists were also reported killed in Asaba and maybe other places, while scores were injured and many others arrested for prosecution.

    Typically, the fatality rate has been a blame game between pro-Biafra activists and the security agencies. The police swore that they were shot at, with their members felled and safety hazarded in other grievous ways by self-provoked violent demonstrators. The activists, however, denied that they attacked security personnel, saying they did not even bear arms. In particular, Media and Publicity Officer of IPOB Emma Powerful accused the Army and the Police of lying in saying pro-Biafra agitators attacked them. He was reported to have said in a statement:  “IPOB under the leadership of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu does not carry any weapon, whether dangerous or not. That is why even the clergy, doctors, lawyers and people of diverse professions could identify and show solidarity with us.”

    But anyone who knows scratch about the Nigerian security architecture also knows that the military don’t get called into civil security matters until the situation explodes beyond the control of the police. And that could only be in cases where the security threat, like a protesting crowd, has shown an edge in deployment of brute force and firepower over the police’s civil remit. We know, for instance, that the military were called in to intervene in Onitsha, among other places. The 82nd Division of the Nigerian Army subsequently said it invoked extant Rules of Engagement to resort to self-defense, and also protect the strategic Niger Bridge. A statement last week by the Deputy Army Public Relations Officer, Colonel H. A. Gambo, added: “All (military) efforts were in order to de-escalate the palpable tension, as well as ward off the apparent threats to lives and property in the general area. In the aftermath of the firefight that ensued, many of our troops sustained varying degrees of injury.”

    Even though Anambra State Police Commissioner Hosea Karma, in a post-crisis press conference, denied knowledge of any civilian fatality in the state, the military confirmed that much. “Five members of MASSOB/IPOB were killed, eight wounded, while nine were arrested for due legal actions,” Gambo said in his statement.

    Well, no one should ever hazard killing, or taking rogue shots at security personnel on their duty beat. They are certified agents of the sovereign and should be so honoured, and they are indeed symbols of the society’s collective safety and mutual preservation of order. If they are not respected and diligently spared rogue assaults, communal peace and order would break down and anarchy would unfurl. This isn’t just a Nigerian thing, it is a universal principle. You cannot shoot a police officer or Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent in the United States, for instance, without expecting fatal consequences.

    Having said this, I think there is something fundamentally wrong about security Rules of Engagement (RoEs) which provide that when certain members in a protesting crowd attack security personnel on duty, the entire crowd should become fair game for lethal response by the assaulted personnel. That seems to be what happened with the Biafra Day rallies, accounting for the reported fatalities. Some activists were said to have been hunted down while worshipping in churches, with the officiating clerics arrested. Many of those, obviously, are among persons now being prosecuted for the disturbances.

    Civilised societies of the world must have other RoEs that safeguard the basic right of disenchanted people to free expression in a democracy, while isolating rogue elements, who really may not share the cause of the mass of the people and may just be mischievous infiltrators in a mixed multitude. It should be the duty of security personnel in such societies to separate civil protesters, who should be entitled to freely ventilate alternative opinions, from malefactors that deserve to be cracked down on and apprehended.

    Bottom line: the Biafra Day killings, on both sides, were brutish and unfitting for a purported democracy. Protesters should not be willy-nilly mowed down by security personnel just because there were some persons in the crowds that were violent, and who had launched misguided attacks on the agents. But also, intending demonstrators must regard it a sacred duty to diligently prime their mass actions against security violations by rogue elements. That should be the behavioural norm in a free and pluralistic society.