The Indigenous People of Biafra have hired Chukwuma-Machukwu Ume (SAN) to handle their 2018 appeal against the federal government’s proscription of the group days after the detained leader Nnamdi Kanu was refused bail.
It should be noted that on January 18, 2018, the Federal High Court in Abuja ruled that the federal government’s ban on IPOB was appropriate.
Through its attorney, Ifeanyi Ejiofor Esq., the group approached the Federal Court and cited five reasons, including the fact that IPOB’s activities did not fall under the definition of terrorism acts as stated in Section 2 (1)(a)(b) & (c) of the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013, which would justify such proscription.
Why Nnamdi Kanu Was Denied Bail – IPOB Blows Hot
To aid in a fair and favorable decision of the appeals, Ume has underlined that the present grounds of argument need to be amended.
The Attorney General of the Federation is accused of “looking the other way while the Fulani herdsmen are killing, maiming, and kidnapping all over Nigeria but on the other hand applying to court to proscribe (appellant) IPOB that do not cause any violence,” according to court documents made available to The Whistler by IPOB special counsel Alloy Ejimakor Esq.
The senior attorney stated that if the application is denied, IPOB will suffer significant harm.
The following is a portion of the proposed appeal grounds: “GROUND14”
Follow us on Facebook
Post Disclaimer
The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the author and forum participants on this website do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of Anaedo Online or official policies of the Anaedo Online.