Nnamdi Kanu’s Lawyer Ume Warns Against FG’s Refusal To Comply With UN Order For ‘Immediate Release’ Of IPOB Leader

The federal government has been warned about the risk of non-compliance with the order of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which directed the immediate release of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra.

Kanu is being detained for allegedly jumping bail, running a proscribed group and treason.

However, a High Court in Umuahia acquitted Kanu of jumping bail and awarded damages against the federal government.

The UN Working during its 93rd session ordered the immediate release of Kanu who is being detained in the custody of the Department of State Services in Abuja. He was forcefully brought from Kenya to Nigeria last year in a manner lawyers claim violated international laws.

One of Kanu’s counsel, Chukwuma-Machukwu Ume, SAN, in the letter, entitled ‘Urgent Implementation of the UN Universally Accepted Opinion’, which was made available to THE WHISTLER by Kanu’s special counsel, Barr Aloy Ejimakor, said Nigeria risks being reported to the Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment for appropriate action’.

The letter was addressed to Nigeria’s AGF and foreign affairs minister.

According to Ume, “By placing Mr Kanu in solitary confinement, the FG subjected him to torture in violation of the Convention Against Torture. Such violation makes Mr Kanu’s detention arbitrary under article 9 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 9 (1) of the Covenant.”

Among the charges Kanu faces is jumping bail in 2017.

Ume clarified that, “The FG arrested Mr Kanu on terrorism-related offences in 2015, and attempted to assassinate him on 10 September 2017 in an army-led attack that killed five individuals and wounded 30 others.

“On 21 September, 2017 the FG reportedly listed the Indigenous People of Biafra as a terrorist organization during ex-parte proceedings lacking elements of due process.

“In Resolution 12/16, the Human Right Council called on states to refrain from imposing restrictions which are not consistent with article 9 (3), including expression of opinion and dissent.”

Kanu was arrested in Kenya and flown to Nigeria last year.

He is being detained in the custody of the DSS and faces copious charges before Justice Binta Nyako.

According to Ume, “Mr Kanu’s life is in jeopardy and that he suffers from medical condition occasioned by gradual depletion of potassium in his system. The Working Group finds that the fair right and procedural guarantees of Mr Kanu were not observed and that such violations render Mr Kanu’s arbitrary under category III.

“The Working Group finds that Mr Kanu has indeed been targeted by the government as a human rights defender.”

The UN Working Group’s report shows that Kanu has been denied medical treatment for his heart condition, adding that, ‘prolonged solitary confinement in excess of 15 consecutive days is prohibited under rules 43(1)(b) and 44 of the Mandela Rules’.

Ume in the letter stated that, “The appropriate remedy would be to release Mr Kanu immediately and for both Kenyan and Nigerian governments to compensate him.”

He said the action would enable the Working Group ‘to inform the Human Rights Council of progress made in implementing its recommendations’.

The Working Group is an integral part of the United Nations Human Rights Council.

It is a quasi-judicial body that has the mandate of the UN to adjudicate human rights petitions.

Our correspondent gathered that the Opinion of the Working Group ‘is legally binding on Nigeria because it is based primarily on Universal Human Rights standards set by Article 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966’, among others.

The letter stated that, “The ratification is a means by which a nation renders itself subject to international laws and treaties. And by virtue of Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria {as amended}, the ratification makes Nigeria bound by whatever treaties, principles, protocols, etc that it ratified and domesticated.

“That Kenya has not taken up a complaint against Nigeria for kidnapping a British citizen in her sovereign State cannot in law be an alibi for Nigeria as to avoid its Rule of Law obligations.

“Nigeria is subject to Decisions cum Opinions issuing from all the United Nations bodies. Nigeria followed through her claims over Bakassi in the International Court of Justice.”