Ifeanyi Ejiofor, the legal representative of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has criticized Simon Ekpa, a self-proclaimed Prime Minister of the Biafra Republic Government-in-Exile based in Finland, labeling him a ‘fraudster’ and ‘opportunist.’ Ejiofor asserts that Ekpa is exploiting the void created by Kanu’s detention for his own gain, a move inconsistent with Kanu’s principles.
In an exclusive interview with DAILY POST, Barrister Ejiofor confirmed that Nnamdi Kanu disapproves of the frequent sit-at-home orders and the resulting disruption of economic activities in the Southeast. He also provided an update on Kanu’s legal case and addressed other topics. Here are some excerpts:
Proponents of the sit-at-home protest argue that it serves as a consistent reminder to the government, demanding the immediate release of Kanu by the Department of State Services (DSS). What is your perspective on this argument?
Their argument lacks merit and is fundamentally flawed. How can it be logical when Nnamdi Kanu himself, for whom the sit-at-home is supposedly being observed, has directly instructed that it should cease because he disagrees with that approach?
It’s important to clarify that MNK (Mazi Nnamdi Kanu) has officially revoked the sit-at-home directive. This decision was made because the strategy has become ineffective. Kanu expressed his disapproval of this tactic nearly two years ago. When the Directorate of State (DOS) initially proposed the sit-at-home, Kanu instructed me to inform them to cancel it. He warned that this approach could be exploited by criminal elements to cause chaos in our communities.
The IPOB leadership, after being informed of MNK’s directive, understood his perspective and subsequently revoked the sit-at-home order. However, after the cancellation was announced and aligned with MNK’s directive, some individuals seeking personal relevance saw an opportunity to gain attention. They began issuing conflicting orders, insisting that the sit-at-home should persist. They used insults and threats to manipulate unsuspecting people into believing they were acting in MNK’s best interest. Unbeknownst to many, the main proponent of the sit-at-home has different intentions. His agenda and ideology significantly differ from what people perceive.
MNK has consistently conveyed messages urging people to cease the sit-at-home activities related to his case. He expressed in court that he desires calmness and peace in the Southeast. He clarified that his personal suffering aims to liberate the Igbo people. These statements were made unequivocally and voluntarily. He even wrote a direct note to the person coordinating the sit-at-home, advising against its enforcement for his sake. It’s impossible to reconcile MNK’s agenda, which centers around his detainment and the subsequent liberation of his people, with the actions of those perpetuating kidnappings, killings, and other criminal activities. The groups enforcing the sit-at-home do not share MNK’s interests and ideology.
As part of MNK’s legal team, has the sit-at-home had any impact on the federal government’s actions?
The sit-at-home has proven ineffective and will not influence the federal government’s actions regarding MNK. In fact, I have reason to suspect that the government is content with the turmoil in the Southeast. I believe that the individual orchestrating the sit-at-home from Finland is receiving support and funding from the government.
For instance, several communities in Imo State are under the control of these criminals. The government is aware of these communities but, instead of deploying security forces to address the issue, they are targeting innocent individuals for arrest. Regrettably, innocent people are being arrested and even killed in the East, with many brought to Abuja in large numbers.
I personally know someone who lost their sibling and, when I inquired about the funeral arrangements, I was informed that permission must be obtained from the criminal groups operating in the area. These criminals dictate the timing, date, guest list, and duration of events, even burials. This dire situation is prevalent in parts of Imo and Anambra states, despite claims by the governors that they are addressing insecurity.
Recently, a new directive has emerged for the government to apprehend these criminals. The impact of the sit-at-home on MNK’s case is negligible.
Can you provide an update on MNK’s legal case?
Nnamdi Kanu’s life has been marked by hardships, making it understandable that he feels distressed for numerous reasons. He was abducted in Kenya on June 19, 2021, tortured for eight days, subjected to inhumane treatment, held in substandard conditions, and subjected to extraordinary rendition to Nigeria. On June 29, he was presented in court for a pre-existing case without notifying his legal team. The court ordered his detention at the Department of State Services (DSS) facility. However, DSS facilities are not designed for holding pre-trial detainees. The correct institution is the correctional service center.
We vigorously challenged the charges against him, as the government repeatedly amended them. They started with five charges, increased to seven, then ten, and finally, fifteen charges. Throughout these amendments, we lodged objections concerning the validity of the charges and the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case, citing severe violations of international and domestic laws in his extradition to Nigeria.
Furthermore, the evidence supporting the charges against him lacked credibility. These grounds formed the basis of our objections.
The last charge comprised fifteen counts, which were challenged in court. The court upheld our objection and struck several counts, leaving seven. We appealed these remaining counts. On October 13, 2022, the Court of Appeal ruled in favor of MNK, not only dismissing the seven charges but also ordering his unconditional release and halting any further prosecution, detention, or indictment against him.
Despite serving the government with this court order, they have not complied. Instead, they appealed to the same Court of Appeal to stay the judgment. While we are not opposed to the government’s right to appeal, they should have followed the declarative order to release him. The Court of Appeal, strangely, ruled on this application and granted a stay on October 18, 2022.
The government proceeded to the Supreme Court to contest the Court of Appeal’s ruling. We, too, appealed the stay of execution order. All three appeals are pending before the Supreme Court, with a definitive hearing scheduled for September 14, 2023.
How has MNK been affected by his detention by the DSS?
It’s evident that he is enduring emotional trauma. He is isolated, without human contact. His rights are consistently violated, even though a competent court had ordered his release. Instead of complying, the government appealed the decision. The treatment of court orders with disregard and impunity illustrates their disrespect for the rule of law and democratic principles.
Despite this, we remain committed to the legal process and trust that justice will be served on September 14, 2023.
Disclaimer
The provided information is intended for general awareness and may not be entirely accurate or up-to-date. The post disclaims any warranties regarding the completeness, accuracy, or reliability of the content, services, or graphics on the website. It advises caution when using the information for any purpose.
