THE WISDOM OF THE CUSTOMARY GOVERNMENT OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF BIAFRA-
© EMEKA EMEKESRI, ESQ., 2016.
SOLICITOR FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF BIAFRA.
1. Introduction:
Following
the Press Interview granted to the Sunday SUN Newspaper on 17th April
2016 by Dr Dozie Ikedife, the Deputy Leader of Indigenous People of
Biafra (IPOB), it has become expedient for me to make this statement in
my personal capacity as the Solicitor for Indigenous People of Biafra
having the conduct of the case between Biafra and Nigeria in the Suit No
FHC/OW/CS/192/2013 pending in the Federal High Court Owerri, Nigeria.
The case started in 2012 as Suit No FHC/OW/CS/102/2012. I have decided
to make this public statement to clarify various issues and questions
emanating from the conducts of some pro-Biafran activists who have
brought confusions into the Biafran independence movement.
Let me quote some portions of the Newspaper publication. In the Press Interview, the SUN Newspaper wrote as follows:
“The
average person in Nigeria knows that Nnamdi Kanu is the Director of
Radio Biafra based in London, Britain. But what most people do not know
is that he is not the leader and founder of Indigenous People of Biafra
(IPOB). Nevertheless, he has through his incarceration by the Department
of State Services become the face of IPOB”.
“Now,
Nnamdi Kanu has adopted and is using the acronym, IPOB. People say
Nnamdi Kanu is the leader of IPOB. The truth is that Kanu is the
Director of Radio Biafra. We founded the IPOB, not Kanu. In the IPOB we
founded, there is division of labour. Kanu only handled the
communication wing of the organization but he went ahead to arrogate
himself as the founder of IPOB because of the instrumentality of the
Radio Biafra. The Supreme Council of Indigenous People of Biafra
expressed displeasure in the
language
he used in his broadcast and the programme he was presenting. So,
calling him the leader of the IPOB is a wrong crown on a wrong head”.
Question:
“Now, what differentiates your organization and the one Kanu purportedly leads?”
Answer:
“The
Supreme Council of Indigenous People of Biafra, using Bilie Human
Rights Initiative as a corporate body follows legal, peaceful and
diplomatic process to go about the issue of self-determination to the
extent that this Bilie Human Rights Initiative held a meeting on April
14 with the United Nations Security Council Committee. The purpose of
the meeting was to find means of countering the funding of terrorist
groups- people who are declaring war, harassing other peace-loving
citizens. There lies the great difference. The real IPOB is a peaceful,
legal, diplomatic, law-abiding group. We have also been given
Consultative Status of the ECOSOC of the United Nations. The interest of
the Supreme Council of Indigenous People of Biafra is well represented
at these international bodies because we are pursuing our
self-determination through legal, diplomatic, law-abiding and peaceful
process, through respect for all laws of the land. We are not talking
about disobeying any law, we are not talking about war, we are not
preaching ethnic hatred. We do not support insulting elders or
constituted authority. We are not threatening physical assault on any
individual or group. These cannot be the solution”.
Question: “Could Kanu’s hijack of your IPOB be the reason your organization did not talk about his release?”
Answer:
“We are talking about his release but we are not saying if he has
committed any offence, the law will not take its course. In any case, we
the elders are saying let Kanu be released to us. We can caution him
thereafter. We want him released to us and as elders we will sit him
down and direct him properly. We cannot achieve self-determination
through calling for war and violence of any kind or any method that can
lead to spilling of blood. That should be avoided entirely”.
2.
For a long time I decided not to make any comments regarding Nnamdi
Kanu but since Dr Dozie Ikedife, the Deputy Leader of Indigenous People
of Biafra, has granted this Press Interview to the SUN Newspaper and
given answers to the question as to the differences between the IPOB
governed by the Supreme Council of Elders and the group which Nnamdi
Kanu purportedly leads, I now take the liberty as the Solicitor for
Indigenous People of Biafra to make fair comments on the publication. I
am aware of many pro-Biafra activists including Nnamdi Kanu who are now
standing trials for alleged violations of the Nigerian law. I am not
competent to speak about those people and the allegations against them
because to do so might be prejudicial to the cases and would violate the
rule of sub judice. I will never make any comments on the criminal
matters at all. I would rather speak on the civil issues and internal
problems and confusions that have bedevilled the Biafran independence
movement and the way forward.
3.
Understanding the differences between the original IPOB founded by the
Supreme Council of Elders and the one Nnamdi Kanu purportedly leads
3.1
We have decided to speak out at this time to make the difference very
clear. Some prominent people have called me and said that they joined
Nnamdi Kanu’s IPOB when they heard that I am the Solicitor for
Indigenous People of Biafra but they were surprised that I had not taken
any action against the Nigerian Government on behalf of Nnamdi Kanu.
They know that I am the Solicitor with the conduct of the case between
Biafra and Nigeria in the Federal High Court Owerri and thought that
Nnamdi Kanu was one of my clients. The fact that I have distanced myself
from Nnamdi Kanu’s group made them to ask questions. I told them
politely that Nnamdi Kanu’s group is not the same IPOB in the Federal
High Court Owerri pursuing the self-determination case for Biafra by
legal and diplomatic method.
3.2
We have to make it clear to all and sundry that the body known as
Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) was established in 2011 and received
judicial recognition under the Nigerian law in 2012 in suit No
FHC/OW/CS/102/2012 renumbered as Suit No FHC/OW/CS/192/2013 in which the
body was defined as the remnants of the whole Nation of Biafra who were
not consumed in the war, now inhabiting the three contiguous regions of
the South East, parts of the South-South and parts of the Middle Belt
regions of Nigeria. The body is a non-legal entity which sued in a
representative capacity by the human rights organization called Bilie
Human Rights Initiative as explained by Dr Dozie Ikedife in the Press
Interview with the SUN Newspaper.
3.3
While the Solicitor advised that the remnants of the Biafrans and their
descendants who were not consumed in the war should be called
“Indigenous People of Biafra” in accordance with the rules of
International Law and was described as the Solicitor for Indigenous
People of Biafra, it was Dr Dozie Ikedife who gave it the acronym, IPOB,
in 2013. It is not an organization founded by one man but the whole
Nation of Biafra. It is governed under Customary Law by the Supreme
Council of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra. The Leader of the
original Indigenous People of Biafra is His Royal Majesty & His
Lordship, the Honourable Justice Eze Ozobu, OFR (rtd); The Deputy Leader
is Dr Dozie Ikedife, OON, JP; The Secretary-General is the Brig. Gen
Joe Achuzia (rtd); The Public Relations Officer (PRO) is His Royal
Majesty, Eze Iheanyi Nwokenna, OFG, JP; and other prominent Elders that
constitute the Council. These are the Leaders of Indigenous People of
Biafra (IPOB), not Nnamdi Kanu. The Biafra independence movement by the
rule of law has a proper government structure anchored upon the Nigerian
law.
3.4
When Nnamdi Kanu was arrested by the Nigerian Authorities, His
Lordship, the Honourable Justice Eze Ozobu OFR was interviewed by the
Press and he denied ever knowing Nnamdi Kanu. Many pro-Biafra activists
were not happy with His Lordship for his statement to the Press denying
Nnamdi Kanu. But His Lordship was right because Nnamdi Kanu has never
seen or met with the Honourable Justice Eze Ozobu in his life.
In
the Press Interview by the SUN Newspaper, Dr Ikedife said concerning
Nnamdi Kanu as follows: “So, calling him the leader of the IPOB is a
wrong crown on a wrong head”.
3.5
Nnamdi Kanu was ostracised and excommunicated by the Supreme Council of
Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra by a Pubic Notice and Disclaimer
dated 12th May 2014. The Disclaimer was published to the whole world by
the Supreme Council of Elders. The reasons for his excommunication and
ostracism are contained in the Public Notice which is already in the
public domain. I cannot say anything apart from what is already in the
public domain.
3.6
The question posed by the SUN Newspaper as to the differences between
the IPOB under the Supreme Council of Elders and the IPOB which Nnamdi
Kanu purportedly leads has many answers. Essentially, there is a
fundamental difference of ideologies. On 10th Sept 2014, Nnamdi Kanu’s
group wrote a Petition to the Corporate Affairs Commission Abuja (CAC)
to revoke the Certificate of Bilie Human Rights Initiative and arrest
Barr Emeka Emekesiri for not disclosing to the CAC that Bilie was
registered with the intention to fight for the secession of Biafra even
though by legal method. The Petition was signed by Mazi Clifford
Chukwuemeka Iroanya and Mazi Ikenna Alphonsus Nwanonenyi. The title of
their Petition is: “A CASE FOR REVOCATION OF CERTIFICATE OF
INCORPORATION OF BILIE HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE (BHRI) AND THE
PROSECUTION OF ITS TRUSTEES FOR PERJURY”.
3.7
At Paragraph 2 (2) of the Petition, Nnamdi Kanu’s group stated as
follows: “According to Section 2B of BHRI Constitution, the
administrative headquarters of BHRI shall be in Owerri. Is it then a
coincidence that BHRI physical office address is the same as the so
called Indigenous People of Biafra in Owerri who have dragged Nigeria to
court (in conjunction with BHRI) in a legal battle for secession? It is
therefore correct to surmise that BHRI was registered under false
pretence and deceit, by a Nigerian Agency (CAC) and now BHRI is fighting
the same country (for secession) for which the Agency is answerable to.
The loyalty of the CAC to the Federal Government of Nigeria is under
question here”. In this Petition, they actually acknowledged that there
is an entity in Owerri called Indigenous People of Biafra who have
dragged Nigeria to court in conjunction with BHRI. They referred to the
Claimants as the “so called Indigenous People of Biafra in Owerri who
have dragged Nigeria to Court”. But their accusation is that the
Solicitor deceived Nigeria and registered Bilie Human Rights Initiative
which turned around to fight against Nigeria for secession of Biafra by
legal method. They therefore wanted the Federal Government of Nigeria to
revoke the Certificate of BHRI and arrest the Biafran Solicitor for
perjury.
3.8
As the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) did not revoke the
Certificate of BHRI, they wrote another letter dated 13th November 2014
with the caption, “Re: REVOCATION OF CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION OF
BILIE HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE (BHRI)- THE NEED FOR CAC TO TAKE
APPROPRIATE ACTION AS THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY IS WATCHING AND
WAITING”. This was when the Nigerian Lawyers filed a copy of the
Petition in Court as their evidence to defend Nigeria by a Further and
Better
Counter
Affidavit. It was from the Defence filed by the Nigerian lawyers
exhibiting the Petition that we knew for the first time that there was a
Petition written by Nnamdi Kanu’s group against Bilie Human Rights
Initiative. Nnamdi Kanu’s group had alleged that Barrister Emeka
Emekesri deceived the Nigerian Government and registered Bilie without
disclosing the intention to sue Nigeria on behalf of Biafra and
questioned why the Corporate Affairs Commission should register an
Organization that would turn around and fight against Nigeria on behalf
of Biafra by legal method. They sent copies of the Petition to the
Nigerian Lawyers and the Judge of the Federal High Court. This was why
the Defendants tendered the Petition in Court as an exhibit in their
defence. We replied to the Petition both to the Corporate Affairs
Commission and to the Court and proved that their Petition lacked
merits.
3.9
In his postings on the internet tendered as Exhibit B7, Nnamdi Kanu
said he did not believe in the use of legal method or peaceful method to
actualise the independence of Biafra and called Bilie Human Rights
Initiative a fraud for embarking on the use of legal method and stated
as follows:
“The
best antidote to lies and deceit is TRUTH. The best antidote to
treachery and sabotage is death. To all the amateur lawyers
experimenting with Biafra independence in Nigeria law court and their
shameless deceit your end is near. THIS IS THE PM EDITION OF RADIO
BIAFRA LIVE BROADCAST OF 14 JUNE 2014 FROM ENUGU THE CAPITAL CITY OF
BIAFRALAND. In this episode: Three questions Bilie APC/BHRI will never
answer and which they must be pressured to provide answers are:
(1)
Why is Bilie APC/BHRI continuing to deceive Biafrans with a court case
when there is no recorded case in history where a country got
independence through legal method? Ask them to name one country that got
freedoms through the courts
(2) Why is Bilie APC/BHRI in court with a country that has expired given that Nigeria ended on 31st December 2013?
(3)
Why is Bilie APC/BHRI deceiving gullible Biafrans by claiming they will
drag the dead court case at Owerri High Court to the International
Court in The Hague when the lawyers in their team know fully well that
this is a lie? These liars did not tell the Biafrans that only countries
are allowed to refer matters to the International Court, not human
rights group….Say no to further deceit in the name of Biafra, join the
revolution today. Without violence there will be no Biafra. No country
won her freedom through legal method. This legal method rubbish is a
fraud. No compromise, no retreat, no surrender. Biafra or death”!
3.91
His most powerful broadcast and propaganda against us was when he
stated that “Without violence there will be no Biafra. No country won
her freedom through legal method”. With this propaganda, many of our
followers left us and followed him in the exercise of their right to
freedom of association. Thus, he emphasizes that without violence there
will be no Biafra and calls us amateur lawyers experimenting
with
Biafra independence in the Nigerian law courts and threatens that our
end is near. As far as we are concerned, Nnamdi Kanu has not committed
any offence against us by calling us amateur lawyers and threatening
that our end is near. We regard it as empty boasts by a misguided
person. We are still alive. By his little knowledge, Nnamdi Kanu said
that “only countries are allowed to refer matters to the International
Court, not human rights group”. We can excuse him because he is not a
lawyer and not expected to know the rules of law.
3.92
The Supreme Council of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra operates
in Court by the agency of the human rights organization called Bilie
Human Rights initiative which is simply called Bilie. In his postings
and broadcasts, Nnamdi Kanu always referred to the Organization as Bilie
APC/BHRI and makes the public to believe that we are in the APC
Political Party and accuses us of deceiving the people by continuing in
Court with Nigeria which he said had expired on 31st December 2013. We
do not know where he got his information and authority to say that
Nigeria ended on 31st December 2013. We heard the news from Newspaper
reports that he was arrested by the Nigerian Authorities in 2015
(arrested by the “expired” country) and is still in their custody.
3.93
The most significant factor differentiating the original Indigenous
People of Biafra (IPOB) who are in Court with Nigeria in Suit No
FHC/OW/CS/192/2013 from the group which Nnamdi Kanu purportedly leads is
that the original IPOB are governed by the Supreme Council of Elders
under Customary Law and have a physical office address in Enugu Nigeria
where they established the Secretariat of the Customary Government of
Indigenous People of Biafra. I have made it clear in my previous address
that Customary Government is lawful under the Nigerian Law just as the
Sharia Government. The Customary Government website is
www.ipobgovernment.org which anybody can access for more information. My
clients are not hiding because they operate lawfully within the ambit
of the Nigerian Constitution. They are in Court with the Federal
Republic of Nigeria and the Attorney-General of the Federation as the
Claimants in a representative capacity. The Defendants know the real
people who are the Leaders of Indigenous People of Biafra. They are men
of high honour and integrity respected in the whole world. I now advise
all those people who are confused to follow and obey the Supreme Council
of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra.
4. Not Biafra or Death but Biafra and Life:
4.1
From today, I advise all the Biafrans to start singing and proclaiming
“Biafra and Life” by faith and not “Biafra or Death”. Almost 99% of the
Biafrans are Christians who believe in the words of the Lord Jesus
Christ that he has come that we may have life in abundance while the
Devil came to steal, kill and destroy. We do not want any more deaths of
the Biafran activists. The Supreme Council of Elders has not authorised
the Biafrans to go and block the public highways and bridges. The
people of Scotland are also agitating for their independence and we have
not seen them on the road blocking the public highways and bridges in
confrontation with the British Police and British Army. However, we
condemn the Nigerian Police and Army for using excessive and
disproportionate
force to control the unarmed Biafrans protesting for independence.
There shall be no more bloodshed in the name of Biafra. Enough blood has
been shed. We have lost more than 3 million souls. We want everybody to
be alive and see Biafra. It is now Biafra and Life! Let all the
Indigenous People of Biafra start proclaiming the word of faith, “Biafra
and Life”. The Bible says that we shall receive what we confess with
our mouth. It is not Biafra or Death but Biafra and Life!
4.2 Now I want to make comments on the opening paragraph of the SUN Newspaper publication where it was written as follows:
“The
average person in Nigeria knows that Nnamdi Kanu is the Director of
Radio Biafra based in London, Britain. But what most people do not know
is that he is not the leader and founder of Indigenous People of Biafra
(IPOB). Nevertheless, he has through his incarceration by the Department
of State Services become the face of IPOB”.
It
is my opinion that the Nigerian Press, Nnamdi Kanu’s Media Team and the
Nigerian Authorities made Nnamdi Kanu the face of the IPOB even though
they know that the original IPOB is in Court with Nigeria on the
self-determination case under the leadership of the Supreme Council of
Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra. It is also my opinion that their
motive for making him the face of IPOB is to discredit and weaken the
Biafran independence movement. Let me support my opinion by referring to
both natural and spiritual law:
(a)
Violation of the spiritual law for national liberation: In Exodus 3: 16
– 18 (Holy Bible), The LORD God Almighty laid down the spiritual law
for national liberation movement. In a nutshell, the vision-bearer is
required to gather the elders of the land and go with them to confront
the sovereign power that holds them captive. He spoke to Moses as
follows: “Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto
them, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of
Jacob, appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you, and seen
that which is done to you in Egypt: And I have said, I will bring you up
out of the affliction of Egypt … And they shall hearken to thy voice:
and thou shalt come, thou and the elders of Israel, unto the king of
Egypt, and ye shall say unto him, The LORD God of the Hebrews hath met
with us: and now let us go, we beseech thee, three days' journey into
the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to the LORD our God”. From the
scriptures, the vision-bearer is required to gather together the elders
of the land who will meet with the sovereign government face to face and
speak with one voice demanding freedom from their oppressors. This is
what the Supreme Council of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra and
their Solicitors have done by engaging with the Nigerian Government face
to face in the Federal High Court Owerri demanding for their freedom.
Without the backing of the elders of the land, the people shall not be
freed. I believe that the Nigerian Authorities and Nigerian Press know
this spiritual law but decided to make Nnamdi Kanu the face of IPOB to
weaken the spiritual basis of the Biafran independence movement. This is
why the Nigerian Press and Nigerian Authorities do not promote the
powers of the Supreme Council of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra.
(b)
Violation of the natural law of respect for authorities and
dignitaries: In the Book of Jude 1: 8 – 9, it is written concerning
disrespectful people as follows: “Likewise also these dreamers defile
the flesh, reject authority, and speak evil of dignitaries. Yet Michael
the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the
body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but
said, “The Lord rebuke you!” The Bible tells us that even the Archangel
Michael when he disputed with the devil over the body of Moses did not
cast abuses and insults on the Devil but said to the Devil “May The LORD
(Adonai) rebuke you”. If the Archangel Michael with all the powers
vested in him did not insult and abuse the Devil but called upon the
LORD to rebuke the Devil, what gave Nnamdi Kanu the audacity and
effrontery to insult and abuse the Elders, Ministers of God and
Dignitaries of our land? I believe that the Nigerian Authorities and the
Nigerian Press know that Nnamdi Kanu violated this natural law of
respect for authorities and dignitaries but decided to make him the face
of IPOB to weaken the respect for the Biafran independence movement.
4.3
Let me now emphasise on the importance of obeying the constituted
authorities whether under Customary Law or Statutory Law. In the Book of
Romans 13: 1 – 2 (Holy Bible), it is commanded as follows: “Everyone is
to obey the governing authorities. For there is no authority that is
not from God, and the existing authorities have been placed where they
are by God. Therefore, whoever resists the authorities is resisting what
God has instituted; and those who resist will bring judgment on
themselves”. Now, in a democratic government as in Nigeria, there are
three arms of government namely: the Judiciary, the Executive, and the
Legislature. These are the governing authorities by statute and everyone
is commanded to obey them. Under Sharia Law and Customary Law, the
elders of the land are the governing authorities. By the doctrine of
separation of power in statutory governance, the Executive and the
Legislature are checkmated by the Judiciary. Any unconscionable law made
by the Legislature or obnoxious Policy made by the Executive can be set
aside by the Judiciary. Also any rule or order made under Customary Law
which is repugnant and incompatible with natural justice, equity and
good conscience will be set aside by the Judiciary. This is why we can
drag the Federal Government of Nigeria or the Traditional Ruler of a
Community to Court and they will come to the Court to defend themselves
because nobody is above the law.
4.4
I want to allay the fears of many people on both sides (Nigerians and
Biafrans) because I have observed with dismay that many people are not
knowledgeable in the international human rights law on the issues at
hand. I know that some ignorant people may frown at my use of the word
“Biafrans” to describe the Claimants in the ongoing case. We have made
it clear in Court that what Biafra lost after the war of 1967-1970 was
its sovereignty and not the indigenous identity of its people. This was
why we made a strong submission in Court that we are Nigerians by
citizenship but Biafrans by indigenous identity until we gain
independence from Nigeria just as the people of Scotland are British by
citizenship but Scottish by indigenous identity and now seeking for
their own independence from Britain. I have heard some ignorant people
arguing
over
this issue as to whether the Biafran agitators should participate in
Nigerian affairs or use the Nigerian Passports and Nigerian Currency.
4.5
The truth is that Biafra is not yet an independent country and
therefore cannot issue Passports. It is our submission that the Nigerian
Government forced the citizenship of their country upon us against our
will. We were forced to answer Nigerian citizens and forced to use the
Nigerian Passport whether we liked it or not but we still retain our
indigenous identity as Biafrans. This is why the Claimants in the
ongoing suit in the Federal High Court Owerri are called INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE OF BIAFRA who sued in a representative capacity under the
leadership of the Supreme Council of Elders of Indigenous People of
Biafra. The Federal High Court of Nigeria had taken judicial notice of
this name “INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF BIAFRA” as far back as 2012 before Mr
Nnamdi Kanu began in recent times to claim that he is the founder and
leader of Indigenous People of Biafra. He is not the Leader of
Indigenous People of Biafra as Dr Dozie Ikedife has explained in the SUN
Newspaper. However, I will say that Nnamdi Kanu, instead of repenting
and asking the Elders for forgiveness, broke away and took the name of
the original Indigenous People of Biafra and registered it as a private
limited liability company in London called Indigenous People of Biafra
limited (limited by shares) and Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB)
limited by guarantee. The Elders were not happy that he turned the
Biafrans into a private limited liability company owned by two men (Uche
Mefor and Nnamdi Kanu). He is rightly the leader and director of his
limited liability companies registered in London but not the leader of
the Indigenous People of Biafra who are in Court with Nigeria in Suit No
FHC/OW/CS/192/2013.
4.6
I know that many people would like to hear more regarding the statement
that Nnamdi Kanu is not the Leader of Indigenous People of Biafra.
Well, I will refer to the Court Records in the Federal High Court
Owerri, in Suit No FHC/OW/CS/102/2012 and Suit No FHC/OW/CS/192/2013,
which show the Leader of Indigenous People of Biafra as His Royal
Majesty & His Lordship, the Honourable Justice Eze Ozobu, OFR (rtd);
the Deputy Leader as Dr Dozie Ikedife, OON, JP; the Secretary-General
as the Brig. Gen. Joe Achuzia (rtd), and the other members of the
Supreme Council of Elders of Indigenous People of Biafra. These are the
men behind the Biafra independence movement by legal and diplomatic
method which commenced in the Federal High Court Owerri in 2012. These
are the Elders of Biafraland who ostracised Nnamdi Kanu from the Biafran
Independence movement by a Disclaimer and Public Notice when he
misbehaved and refused to repent. The details of what he did that made
the Elders to ostracise him are contained in the Public Notice and
Disclaimer which is already in the public domain. It is an internal
civil matter under our customary law for which the Elders invoked their
powers to discipline their erring child. It is an abomination under our
Customary Law for a child to insult and abuse the Elders of our land.
4.7
Dr Ikedife has said to the Press as follows: “We are talking about his
release but we are not saying if he has committed any offence, the law
will not take its course. In any case, we the elders are saying let Kanu
be released to us. We can caution him thereafter. We want him released
to us and as elders we will sit him down and direct
him
properly”. As a matter of fact, the customary summons or invitation
issued to Nnamdi Kanu by the Indigenous People of Biafra dated 5th Oct
2013 to come and defend himself against various complaints is still
waiting for him. The Elders therefore want him to be released to them so
that they could “sit him down and direct him properly” in accordance
with their customary law. Nobody is above the law.
4.8
I want to clear some confusions created by some pro-Biafra activists.
We are still Nigerians until we gain independence but the people who
started the Biafran independence struggle in the 1990s did not
understand the difference between citizenship and indigenous identity of
a person and therefore claimed in hypocrisy that they were not
Nigerians while using the Nigerian Passports! Those pro-Biafra agitators
misguided their followers and told them that they were not Nigerians
and therefore should not participate in the Nigerian census, Nigerian
politics, Nigerian civil service, etc. In 2015, the broadcaster on the
Radio Biafra told them not to vote in the Nigerian Election and they
obeyed him and abstained from voting just as they abstained from the
2006 Census. In fact, in recent times when my inventions in Estate
Surveying and Valuation Science called Mekadolf Formulae were showcased
in Abuja, some of the Biafrans accused me of being a traitor and
betrayer worse than Judas Iscariot! You can imagine the mind-set and
mentality of the people struggling for the Biafran independence. Much
work is needed to re-orientate their minds. This incident made me to
understand the level of knowledge and wisdom possessed by many people
who describe themselves as Biafran activists. We can excuse their
ignorance and innocent mistakes as they are not knowledgeable in
international human rights law.
5. Biafra Has Been Restored Without a Territory- Breaking News
It
is my submission that the greatest mistake that Nigeria made was to
have spared the remnants of the Biafrans alive. If Nigeria had
annihilated the Biafrans in 1970 A.D., just as Rome annihilated Carthage
in the third Punic war of 146 B.C., there would not have been any
remnants of the Biafrans today to seek for the restoration of their
ancient nation. In my book, “Biafra or Nigerian Presidency- What the
Ibos Want”, I proved by documentary evidence that Biafra had existed as
an ancient country in the Map of Africa for more than 400 years before
Nigeria was created in 1914. Today, we have restored Biafra as a people
governed by their Elders under Customary Law but without a territory yet
under Statute Law. Perhaps, many people do not know that Biafra has
actually come into existence but without a territory. We are a people
with defined identity living in a defined country under a defined de
facto customary government but without a separate territory delineated
by law. We have become a nation-in-waiting. This has some implications
in international human rights law which I shall talk about in due
course. I have observed that many Law Enforcement Officers in Nigeria do
not understand the law and may make mistakes if not properly guided. It
has therefore become expedient for us to explain in detail the
philosophy underlying the existence of the Customary Government of
Indigenous People of Biafra.
6. Customary Government under the Nigerian Legal System:
6.1
In my previous statement entitled “Customary Government is Lawful in
Nigeria”, I cited the provisions of the Nigerian Laws that authorise the
use of customary law and sharia law to govern the people within
Nigeria. The claimants in the Federal High Court Owerri known as
Indigenous People of Biafra are governed under Customary Law by their
Elders called the Supreme Council of Elders. They have established their
Customary Government with their Secretariat at Enugu. The only
limitation is that the people governed under customary law and sharia
law are not sovereign but remain under the sovereignty of Nigeria. But
they have the right to govern themselves as a people within Nigeria.
After the war, the Biafrans were scattered like sheep without a
shepherd. Their republican and individualistic nature made it more
difficult to gather them together. Their political enemies made matters
worse by sowing discord among them, creating enmity among them, planting
political stooges among them, and empowering traitors to rule over
them. The Biafrans became hopeless and helpless in the midst of enemies
within and without. Even among the pro-Biafra agitators, they started
calling themselves bad names such as traitors and betrayers as nobody
could trust anybody again. This was the situation before the lawyers and
the elders joined the Biafran national liberation struggle.
6.2
The first action taken by the lawyers was to anchor the Biafran
independence movement upon the rule of law and diplomacy. As Biafra is
not yet a sovereign nation, it can only sue or be sued in a
representative capacity. This was why the Indigenous People of Biafra
sued Nigeria by the human rights organization known as Bilie Human
Rights Initiative. This human rights organization is registered both
under the Nigerian Law and in the United Nations as a legal entity. It
has been granted the ECOSOC status in the United Nations with three
seats in the UN Headquarters in New York, Geneva and Vienna. This is the
organization that champions the Biafran liberation struggle by the rule
of law and diplomacy. The human rights organization is different from
the people it represents just as an attorney or agent is different from
his principal. It is different from the Customary Government of
Indigenous People of Biafra and cannot take over the government of the
people otherwise its acts would be ultra vires.
7. Respect of and Obedience to the Nigerian Law:
7.1
As Nigerians, we are bound to obey the Nigerian law. It is expedient to
emphasise on the reasons for the establishment of the Customary
Government of Indigenous People of Biafra which is the de facto
government of the Biafrans until they gain their independence. The Rule
of Law abhors anarchy, breach of peace, breach of public order and
propensity to lawlessness. For this reason and in obedience to the
Nigerian Customary Law the Elders of Biafraland rose up to gather their
children together and guide them in their struggle for independence to
avoid anarchy, lawlessness and bloodshed. By our Customary Law, it is
the duty of the Elders of the land to gather their children together and
guide them appropriately. The Biafrans are
no
longer like sheep without a shepherd. If Nigeria breaks up today as
predicted by the American experts, it is the Customary Government of
Indigenous People of Biafra headed by the Supreme Council of Elders that
will gather the people together.
7.2
By the jurisprudence of Section 315 of the Nigerian Constitution which
recognises the validity of the Sharia law and Customary law as existing
laws in force before Nigeria and its Constitution were created, if the
country should disintegrate by an act of God, there would not be any
more legislative houses to make laws but only the Sharia laws and
Customary laws of the people would survive. The Northerners are wiser to
have elevated their Sharia Government into statutory government by
passing the Sharia Bill into law in the Northern States’ Houses of
Assembly. The legal implication is that the Sharia Government in the
North, having been given statutory existence by the State law, has
become a State organ that should be financed by the State. They have
therefore established their Sharia Police and other Sharia Government
organs to enforce the Sharia law in the North. This is a wonderful
legislative engineering performed by the Northern politicians and I
commend them for their foresight.
7.3
The Customary Government of Indigenous People of Biafra is not
fortunate to have intelligent politicians to pass their Bills into law
in their States’ Houses of Assembly. It appears that their politicians
are afraid to talk about their indigenous identity as Biafrans. At the
moment therefore, the Indigenous People of Biafra under the Supreme
Council of Elders are pursuing their organizational goals by self-help
efforts. We advise all the Indigenous People of Biafra to support and
obey the Supreme Council of Elders. It is unfortunate that Nnamdi Kanu,
who was in charge of their Radio Station called Radio Biafra, instead of
promoting the Supreme Council of Elders, suddenly became stubborn,
disrespectful, incorrigible, recalcitrant and abusive to the Elders and
Dignitaries of the land for which reasons the Elders ostracised him
after several efforts to correct him had failed. The Elders rightly
invoked their powers under Customary Law and disciplined their erring
child to instil discipline in him.
8. The Structure to hold the Biafrans Together in times of Crisis- The Customary Government of Indigenous People of Biafra
8.1
There is palpable fear that anything may happen at any time to cause
the disintegration of Nigeria without the fault of anybody. In such a
situation, we call it an act of God. The prediction by the American
experts that Nigeria would disintegrate within 15 years from 2005 has
not yet failed. Many people thought that the Americans gave the year
2015 in their prediction but that is a wrong interpretation. In their
Report in 2005 they predicted the fall of Nigeria in 15 years’ time. As
an expert in the science of estimation, I know that there is always an
acceptable margin of error in forecasting. Sometimes, it can be plus or
minus 5%; or plus or minus 10%; the lower the margin of error the higher
the accuracy of the estimation and closer to the line of best fit if
measured by the use of standard deviation. In effect, the American
experts’ prediction of the fall of Nigeria has not yet failed.
8.2
It is our duty to prepare the people for anything that may happen in
the future. I have said it in my previous statements that our mission is
to set the Biafrans free from Nigeria but not to destroy Nigeria. I
gave examples of many nations that gained independence in the past
without destroying their host countries. From Biblical history, Israel
came out from Egypt without destroying Egypt. In modern times, Eritrea
came out from Ethiopia without destroying Ethiopia. Bangladesh and
Pakistan came out from India without destroying India. South Sudan came
out from Sudan in 2011 without destroying Sudan. Why do people think
that Nigeria would not survive if the Biafrans should go and establish
their own country?
8.3
I want to allay the fears of the owners of Nigeria that their country
would survive if they let us go and build our own country as the
Egyptians allowed the Israelites to go. The foreigners who have invested
in Biafraland will remain the owners of their investments. We shall
remain friendly neighbours as the Israelis and the Egyptians are today,
as the Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and Indians are today. The Nigerians
will not need visas to come to Biafra and the Biafrans will not need
visas to go to Nigeria because both nations are under the ECOWAS Treaty.
Moreover, any Nigerian who wants to maintain dual citizenship is free
to apply to become a Biafran citizen if he meets the requirements under
the Immigration Law. Also any Biafran who wants to maintain dual
citizenship can retain his Nigerian citizenship just as many Nigerians
today are British and American citizens. Why are the people afraid? They
are afraid because they lack knowledge of the law. The Bible says that
the people perish for lack of knowledge, Hosea 4:6.
8.4
It is in preparation for the unknown that the Customary Government of
Indigenous People of Biafra has been established as a de facto
government structure that can hold the people together in times of
crisis. It is not Ohaneze Ndigbo. Its jurisdiction covers all the
Indigenous People of Biafra living in the three contiguous regions of
the South East, parts of the South-South and parts of the Middle Belt of
Nigeria. Ohaneze Ndigbo is only for the Igbo Nation but the Customary
Government of Indigenous People of Biafra headed by the Supreme Council
of Elders is for the entire Biafraland. The composition of the Supreme
Council of Elders must therefore be representative of the entire
Biafraland. It is not an Igbo affair. All the officers of the Customary
Government of Indigenous People of Biafra are hereby advised to commence
effective mobilization and communication to gather the people together
under the Supreme Council of Elders. It is the duty of the elders of the
land to put their house in order. Let us do it now before it is too
late. I hereby authorise the Media Department of the Customary
Government of Indigenous People of Biafra to publish this message in
booklets and distribute it to the whole world where the Biafrans are
found.
Signed:
Emeka Emekesri, Esq.
Solicitor for Indigenous People of Biafra
BIAFRA BY POWER OF LAW & DIPLOMACY
Reviewed by Unknown
on
Tuesday, January 24, 2017
Rating:
No comments: