NNAMDI KANU LEADER OF THE OUTLAWED IPOB, HYPOCRITES & HYPOCRISY OF THE NORTHERN LAWMAKERS

NNAMDI KANU LEADER OF THE OUTLAWED IPOB, HYPOCRITES & HYPOCRISY OF THE NORTHERN LAWMAKERS

By Comrade Musa Mohammed 

Releasing Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), will be tantamount to rewarding criminality, he should be made to face the law.

That idiot and traitor if release would fuel impunity.

Let me remind those vagabonds law makers who want Nnamdi Kanu to be release, most especially our northern legislators that the federal government of Nigeria has make it clear Why they don’t want to release him, tells Appeal Court, gave reasons why it has not complied with the Court of Appeal judgement that ordered it to release the detained leader of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB.

FG, in an affidavit it filed in support of its application to stay the execution of the judgement, described Kanu as “a flight risk person”, insisting that the case against him borders on national security.

Relying on the decided case law in Federal Republic of Nigeria Vs Asari Dokubo, FG, argued that once a case touched on national security, the right of the individual affected takes secondary place.

“The Respondent is a flight risk person. It is important to appreciate the gamut of depositions in our application.

“One of the ground of our application is that this matter touches on national security of the state.

“We rely on the case of FRN Vs Dokubo, where the Supreme Court held that where national security is threatened or likelihood of it being threatened, human rights take secondary place.

“Once there is a threat to national security, human rights of any individual can be suspended until such threat is taken care of.

“Once security of the nation is in jeopardy, the individual right may not even exist”, FG argued through its lawyer, Mr. David Kaswe, an Assistant State Counsel in the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation.

It further told the court that there is intelligence report that releasing Kanu from detention would worsen the security situation in the South East region and Nigeria.

Recall, during EndSars, Nnamdi Kanu was walking free. What did he do? He poured petrol on the flames of EndSars. Now, he has been caught. What of the people who have died? This is a criminal. He should face the law.

Releasing Nnamdi Kanu is rewarding criminality and rewarding gruesome murder of innocent people including our Northern people who were brutally killed, their properties snatched away, others destroyed. 

Nnamdi kanu should face the law for the actions and instigations he has carried out.

We are all aware that in the Southeast, the IPOB are waging war against the government of this country and many local governments, many communities are deserted, schools are closed, hospitals are closed because of Nnamdi and his followers, why are this bunches of hypocrites are calling for the release of a terrorist and a traitor.

Therefore, the federal government of Nigeria urgently needs a new definition of treason that will recognise the nature of the threats we face today.

If people like Nnamdi Kanu they had been convicted of treason and imprisoned for life, Nigeria would be considerably safer.

The Nigeria legislators both the red and the green chambers should enact a new offence which would revive the law of treason and recognise that betrayal – treason – is a clear moral wrong.

This would specify that it is an offence to aid a state or organisation that is attacking the nation.

This should apply to the actions of anyone in Nigeria; it should also apply to the actions of nigeria citizens or settled non-citizens anywhere in the world.

In most cases, people convicted of treason should be sentenced to life imprisonment, a sentence which reflects the gravity of the wrong of betrayal, deters others, and incapacitates the offender.

At a minimum, Nigeria legislators should reform our law to follow Australia and New Zealand and thus make it clear that it is unlawful to aid the enemy either in an international armed conflict or in a non-international armed conflict.

In a Foreword, former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales Lord Judge writes:

Most of us have not the slightest doubt that treason is and should be a very serious crime. We need to reconsider whether the current laws against terrorism and disclosure of official secrets are adequate to cover what might be or, arguably, should be treated as treason.

The northern legislators should know that for supporting Nnamdi Kanu, a betrayal, you are the same as undermining your country by helping its enemies, which has been recognised as a terrible crime. It is not just an act of violence but destroys the bonds of trust that hold a community together. That’s why the preparation or use of violence by a Nigerian citizen against our own people is such a serious threat. It undermines our common defence and political order and ought to be punished severely.  Betrayal is a breach of the duty each of us owes to our fellow citizens.