Outlawed Igbo separatist group, the Indigenous People Of Biafra (IPOB), has filed a fresh motion for injunction challenging a recent ruling by the Court of Appeal judgment that upheld an earlier ruling that had designated the group as a terrorist organisation.
The Appeal Court had, in a judgment delivered by Hama Akawu Barka, O. E. Abang and O. O. Oyewunmi, JICA in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/214/2018 on January 30, 2025, upheld the proscription of IPOB as a terrorist organization by the Nigerian government.
However, the motion which was filed on Thursday by Aloy Ejimakor, Lead Counsel to detained leader of IPOB, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, stated that the aim was to checkmate the imminent danger of deploying the judgment as a cover to unleash extrajudicial killings in the South-East region.
According to Ejimakor, the motion filed at the Abuja division of Court of Appeal, is also seeking an “order of injunction restraining the Attorney General of the Federation, who is the respondent in the suit, its agents, associates, privies, representatives, any agency of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and or person(s) howsoever described or called, including the military and paramilitary outfits, operations and commands from giving effect, acting upon or in any manner carrying into effect the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, pending the hearing and determination of the appeal lodged on February 7, 2025 against the judgment at the Supreme Court.”
“UPDATE: Yesterday, we filed a Motion for injunction against the Court of Appeal judgment that affirmed the infamous proscription of IPOB. The Motion is aimed at checking the imminent danger of deploying the judgment as a cover to unleash extrajudicial killings in Southeast.”
Going further, the statement said the group is also seeking “an order that all the parties herein and their agents, associates, privies, representatives, any agency of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and or person(s) howsoever described or called, including the military and paramilitary outfits, operations and commands maintain status quo as it existed before the Judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division coram: Hama Akawu Barka, O. E. Abang and 0.0 Oyewunmi, JJCA delivered in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/214/2018 between the Appellant and the Respondent on the 30th day of January, 2025 pending the hearing and determination of the appeal lodged on the 7th day of February, 2025 against the said Judgment before the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
“The Appellant is utterly dissatisfied with the said Judgment and has consequently filed a Notice of Appeal on the 7th day of February, 2025 to the Supreme Court containing Five (5) grounds of Appeal against the said Judgment.”
“The order obtained ex parte proscribing the Appellant and declaring the Appellant a terrorist organization breached and infringed on the Appellant’s right to fair hearing guaranteed under Section 36 of the Constitution of Nigeria, 1999 and which fair hearing rights is non-derogable under any circumstances including national security and the likes.
“In circumstances of the case, the term or phrase “Judge in Chambers” does not mean ex parte proceedings and that the failure to allow the Appellant to make representations before the Federal High Court during which time the Respondent was heard ex parte and an order make proscribing the Respondent constitute a flagrant violation of the right of the Appellant to fair hearing more particularly when the order obtained ex parte has far-reaching criminal effect on the Appellant contrary to Section 36 (5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that presumes the Appellant innocent until a full trial is conducted and the Appellant found guilty.
“The order proscribing the Appellant as a terrorist organisation and obtained ex parte violates the Appellant’s right against discrimination by subjecting the Appellant to disabilities and restrictions on the basis of ethnic inclinations and political opinion centred on self determination permissible under Sections 42 of the Constitution of Nigeria, 1999 and Article 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act ap. A9 LFN 2004.
“In spite of the claims that the proceedings leading to the proscription of the Appellant as a terrorist organisation is a civil nature, the standard of proof in the circumstances where criminal allegations of terrorism, murder or threat thereof and bomb making in accordance with Section 138 of the Evidence Act, 2011 and which standard was not and could not have been proved by affidavit evidence in support of ex parte application.
“The trial court and the Court of Appeal usurped the functions of the executive arm of government of Nigeria by proclaiming a state of emergency by way of national security under which the rights of the Appellant to fair trial was erroneously derogated.”
