Inaugurating A New President On May 29 Is Not Absolute

By Aloy Ejimakor

Yesterday (May 4, 2023), I tweeted on my Twitter handle that “Given that the FINALITY of election result is decided by the Court, except where the INEC-declared result is uncontested, it’s unconstitutional to swear-in a winner whose victory has not been affirmed by the Court. Where’s the law that says such a winner must be sworn-in? None!”

Igboland And Its Hidden Tributaries To The Atlantic

 By Aloy Ejimakor

It’s often said that a lie told so many times, if unchallenged, may – in the course of time and generations – begin to pass for the truth. One of such is the terrible lie and brazen propaganda, institutionally purveyed (against the Igbo) since the end of the Civil War, to the effect that Igboland is landlocked or has no access to the Atlantic Ocean.

The purpose of this essay, therefore, is to rebut this fat lie with some simple historical, geographical and topographical evidence that are in plain view, if you care to dig into the archives or conduct some basic physical explorations of your own. In the same vein, those that mock the Igbo on this account might as well imbibe the truth and pedal back to reason and reality.

Why Buhari Must Let Nnamdi Kanu Go

 By Ikechukwu Amaechi

I am not a lawyer. But in writing this article, I spoke to learned friends who, in unanimity, held that President Muhammadu Buhari’s government has no legal beam to hang its jaundiced interpretation of the Appeal Court judgement that discharged the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, of terrorism charges.

*Kanu

In a historic and courageous judgement, a three-man panel of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, on Thursday, October 13, discharged Kanu of the seven-count charge pending against him before the Federal High Court. The judgement, unprecedented in its audacity, faulted the process through which the IPOB leader was brought before the court to answer to a 15-count terrorism charge.

International Criminal Court: An Early Warning For Nigerian Officials

 By Aloy Ejimakor

The Rome Statute is the international treaty that founded the International Criminal Court. Comprising of 13 parts, it establishes the governing framework for the Court. Adopted at the Rome Conference on July 17, 1998, it came into force on July 1, 2002, thereby creating the International Criminal Court. The Statute sets out the Court’s jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and – as of an amendment in 2010 – the crime of aggression.

Nigeria has ratified the Statute, thus making the Nigerian State and non-state actors subject to the jurisdiction of ICC. The Nigerian State means its President and his appointees, especially the heads of the security agencies, their commanders, officers and the other ranks under them. It also includes governors and all personnel working under their authority, directly or indirectly.

Nigeria: Attorney-General Is Wrong On Open Grazing

 

By Aloy Ejimakor

Days ago, Abubakar Malami (SAN), the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) granted an interview to Channels Television in which he faulted Southern Governors’ ban on open grazing. The AGF is wrong; Southern Governors are right, and here’s why:

Before one can graze, he must be a cattle rearer or a herdsman. The herdsman would have to enter another person’s land. If the herdsman is grazing on his own land, it does not implicate any legal, safety or economic issues because the land belongs to him. But when he goes upon another man’s land to graze without permission or some leave and license, he commits trespass, civil and criminal trespass to boot.

The Enugu Massacre And Why Tribe Matters

By Aloy Ejimakor
The invitation admittedly extended to the Army by the Enugu State  Police Commissioner ahead of the deadly shooting at Emene was too prompt and bears stark evidence of premeditation for lethal violence against the Igbo element on the part of the Commissioner of Police.

This premeditation stems from the customary lack of compatriot empathy often exhibited by some Northern Muslim security chiefs and other ranks towards Igbos when it comes to law enforcement of this kind, even when the target of such enforcement is, without regard to their numbers, unarmed and nonviolent.

Enugu Massacre: Forget IPOB, They Are Ndigbo

By Aloy Ejimakor

A famous Nigerian politician once said (in spirited defense of the Yoruba) that “before I became a Nigerian, I was Yoruba”. And another one said: “We will write this for all to read. Anyone, soldier or not that kills the Fulani takes a loan repayable one day no matter how long it takes.”

The Yoruba has, in moderation, said his own. The Fulani has, in extremism, said his own. Let me now, as an Igbo, say my own, and here it is: Whoever takes the life of an IPOB member is taking the life of an Igbo and therefore will ultimately account to Ndigbo. It’s not a threat; it’s a fact.

Igboland Is Not Landlocked!

By Aloy Ejimakor

It’s often said that a lie told so many times, if unchallenged, may – in course of time – begin to pass for the truth. One of such is the terrible lie, institutionally purveyed since the end of the Civil War, to the effect that Igboland is landlocked or has no access to the sea. The purpose of this essay, therefore, is to debunk this lie with some simple historical and topographical evidence that are even in plain view, if you care to dig or do some physical explorations of your own.

*John Nnia Nwodo
President General, Ohaneze Ndigbo

Suffice it to say that it is a profound tragedy that entire generations of the immediate post-War Igbos never bordered to check but seemingly accepted this brazen institutional falsehood, largely intended to taunt the Igbo and put them down. A few that knew it to be false just didn’t care anymore. And that History was banned since the end of the Civil War made it worse, plus the fact that most people don’t take physical Geography that serious anymore, otherwise they would have known that Abia, Imo and Anambra States have varying short-distance paths to the Atlantic through Imo, Azumiri and Niger Rivers.

Nnamdi Kanu: Nigerian Army Is In Contempt Of Court

By Aloy Ejimakor

This piece is a summary of the legal/other consequences of the Army's mid-September armed invasions of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu's homestead at Umuahia, Abia State. The state of affairs before the invasion was that Nnamdi Kanu was free on bail on a subsisting court order; his bail was not on personal recognizance but on a bond posted by a third-party obligor/surety; and Kanu was neither judicially-ordered to be re-arrested for breaching his bail, or on account of any new charges filed.

*Kanu

It is beyond argument that the invasion achieved complete routing of Nnamdi Kanu's home and caused fatalities and injuries to a yet to be determined number of people, including Nnamdi Kanu, who were present and trapped at the premises throughout the attacks. The invading forces also 'captured' an undetermined number of occupants of the premises, none of whom is accounted for to date. Most significantly, Nnamdi Kanu has not been seen or heard from since then.

The inevitable question that has arisen from the foregoing set of facts is this: What are the consequences of such an obviously deadly military action against an accused person who was free on bail? The following analysis will provide some answers.