Tobias Sylvester
An Abuja Federal High Court has been asked to declare the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, a terrorist.
An Igbo man, Mr. Donald Okonkwo, who identified himself as “a law-abiding citizen” and indigene of Agbor town in Delta North Senatorial District, wants the court to determine whether the British Government, is not under obligation to repatriate the IPOB leader who he described as “a fugitive cum terrorist”, to Nigeria.
In the suit, Okonkwo listed the British High Commission in Nigeria, the Department of State Services (DSS) and the attorney-general of the federation as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants respectively in the case.
Okonkwo in the suit he filed through his counsel, Abiodun Sodiq told the court that Kanu was hiding in the UK.
He requested that the court should order for the repatriation of the IPOB leader within 21 days. The petition reads:
“Whether the 1st Defendant is not under obligation to repatriate the IPOB separatist leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, being a fugitive cum terrorist from Great Britain where he has been hiding since September 2017 under the cover of his citizenship status back to Nigeria so he can stand his trial for treasonable felony, amongst other sundry offences, pending against him before Honourable Justice (Mrs.) Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court Abuja?
“Whether by a true interpretation of Sections 1, 4 and 5 of the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 the 2nd Defendant has not abdicated his duties by failing, neglecting or omitting to arrest and extradite the IPOB separatist leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, from Great Britain back to Nigeria so he can stand his trial for treasonable felony, amongst other sundry offences, considering the Bench Warrant issued on 28th March 2019 by Honourable Justice (Mrs.) Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court Abuja for the arrest of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu after it was determined that he flouted his bail conditions?
“Whether the 3rd Defendant, as the Chief Law Officer of the Federation is not under a statutory duty to advise the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to severe diplomatic relations with the 1st Defendant for harbouring Mazi Nnamdi Kanu being a fugitive cum terrorist in Great Britain and whether the failure of the 3rd Defendant does not amount to abdication of his duties under the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013?”
He said the court should declare that the 2nd respondent “abdicated his duties by failing, neglecting or omitting to arrest and extradite the IPOB separatist leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, from Great Britain back to Nigeria so he can stand his trial for treasonable felony, amongst other sundry offences.”
