The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has accused the federal government of seeking to frustrate the hearing of its fundamental human rights enforcement suit.
It said this while reacting to the application filed by the government at the community court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), challenging the fundamental rights suit before the court.
In 2016, Nnamdi Kanu, IPOB leader, filed an $800m compensation suit at the court against the federal government for his “unlawful” arrest and detention in 2015.
But the government through its counsel — Maimuna Shiru — urged the court to quash the suit, while accusing Kanu of jumping the bail granted him by the federal high court in Abuja where he is being tried for alleged treasonable felony.
Reacting to an application filed by the federal government, IPOB alleged that the federal government had resorted to “blackmail, cheap lies and misinformation” in the matter.
“The case of abuse of fundamental human rights by the Buhari regime brought by the leader of IPOB Mazi Nnamdi Kanu at the ECOWAS court has been pending for two years, with the government employing all manner of delay tactics to frustrate the case,” the group said in a statement on Monday.
“Now they are holding Nnamdi Kanu in their custody, having denied such publicly, they have finally woken up to ask the court to dismiss the charges against them.
“It will be fair to assume, going by the antics of this government, that their primary reason for the raid on the home of the IPOB leader, was to remove him from circulation and truncate all legal matters involving him.”
Emma Powerful, IPOB spokesman, who issued the statement said the government should “stop running to the pages of newspapers to conduct litigation and prosecution, adding: “They should come to the law court to defend their record.”
“Let the strength of their evidence speak for them rather than relying on cheap propaganda. Cases are won and lost in the law courts not on the pages of newspapers,” it added.
“As long as Nigerian army extra-judicially invaded the home of an unarmed man without court warrant, they are responsible for producing him in court.”