OPEN LETTER TO:
Mr. Abubakar Malami, SAN
Attorney General of the Federation And Minister for Justice
Office of the AGF, Federal Ministry of Justice
Federal Secretariat Complex, Shehu Shagari Way
Central Area, FCT, Abuja, Nigeria
Dear AGF,
Constitution Still Wails At 56: Exposing Unconstitutional
And Long Detention Without Trial By DSS Of Nigerian Citizens Including Comrade
Chidiebere Onwudiwe And Other Unarmed IPOB Activists
(Onitsha Nigeria, 2nd of October 2016)-It is with
deepest dismay that the leadership of International
Society for Civil Liberties and the Rule of Law: INTERSOCIETY write your
public office through this public or open letter to inform you and other
Nigerians and international watchers that the 1999 Constitution and the Rule of
Law under your watch as “the Law Officer of the Federation” are gravely threatened,
undermined, disrespected and battered particularly by the authorities of the
Department of the State Security (DSS).
It saddens us, too, that the Nigerian Constitution, presently
known as the 1999 Constitution, is
still wailing after 56 years of its existence. As a responsible advocate of
human rights, rule of law and constitutionalism in Nigeria, we stand condemned
divinely, earthly, humanly and conscientiously if we watch idly and see the
1999 Constitution and the Rule of Law being
systematically ridiculed, battered and bastardized with reckless abandon by the
authorities of the DSS and other lawless security agencies in Nigeria.
As you may know, Dear AGF, we are
fully aware of the state of criminal justice in Nigeria and its midwifery by
the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended in 2011,
otherwise called “the 1999 Constitution”. Our writing you and your public
office as “the Attorney General of the Federation” is not to ask for a favour,
but to clearly and unambiguously remind you of your constitutional and
statutory powers and duties as Nigeria’s Attorney General and task you to
exercise the powers and perform the duties which the 1999 Constitution
mandatorily direct you to do.
For the avoidance of doubt, Dear
AGF, Section 150 (1) of the 1999 Constitution clearly provides as follows: there shall be an Attorney General of the
Federation who shall be the Chief Law Officer of the Federation and a Minister
of the Government of the Federation.
Further Sir, Section 174(1) of
the 1999 Constitution directs that: the
Attorney General of the Federation shall have power:
(a) To institute and undertake
criminal proceedings against any person before any court of law in Nigeria,
other than a court martial, in respect of any offence created by or under any
Act of the National Assembly;
(b) To take over and continue
any such criminal proceedings that may have been instituted by any other
authority or person (i.e. DSS); and
(c) To discontinue at any stage
before judgment is delivered any such criminal proceedings instituted by him or
any other authority or person.
Section 174 (2) further directs
that: the powers conferred upon the
Attorney General of the Federation under subsection (1) of this section may be
exercised by him in person or through officers of his department.
Section 174 (3) also states: In exercising his powers under this section,
the Attorney General of the Federation shall have regard to the public
interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal
process.
Our writing your public office
therefore, is formidably predicated on the foregoing. This letter, too, comes
on the heels of the 56th Independence Anniversary of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria, which is one of the most important periods in the history
of the country. The referenced Anniversary should also be a stock-taking by
Nigeria’s present political leaders particularly as it concerns cessation or
stoppage of regime atrocities against the citizens such as the one warranting
this letter.
To make the matter worse, Dear
AGF, the constitutionalism and the rule of law being battered and bastardized
with reckless abandon by the DSS and other lawless security agencies today are
the foundation upon which Nigeria as an independent country was laid on 1st
October 1960. As it was boldly written in the Independence Constitution of
1960, so it is in the present 1999 Constitution where its Preamble sacredly
holds that “the Federal Republic of Nigeria is founded for the purpose of
promoting the good government and welfare of all persons on the Principles of
Freedom, Equality and Justice; and for the purpose of consolidating the unity
of all Nigerians”.
Specific Reasons For Writing Your Public Office: Your public office may be aware
that the Nigerian security forces particularly the Nigerian Army, the Nigeria
Police Force and the DSS had since August 2015 launched a widespread violent
crackdown on nonviolent and unarmed Pro Biafra activists particularly members
and supporters of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leading to the death
of as much as 250 of them and wounding of over 300 others. Over 100 of them are
still languishing in various security prisons and detention facilities across
the Southeast and the South-south of Nigeria under “committal proceedings” or “Holden
Charge”. Dozens of others have also gone missing or disappeared. Scores have
been killed in detention; while 4.8 out of every 5 Pro Biafra activists
arrested by the DSS, the Army and the Police are gravely tortured.
The massacre of as much as 250
Pro Biafra activists particularly IPOB members took place in eight different
locations in the Southeast and the South-south of Nigeria. Two most horrible of
the massacre was carried out in Aba, Abia State on 9th of February
2016 when the security forces forced their way into a perimeter fenced public
secondary school compound where IPOB activists were singing and praying and opened fire on them, killing at least 22
and injuring over 30 others. The second most horrible, which is also most
bloody of all took place at Nkpor in Anambra State and Asaba in Delta State on
30th of May 2016 during which as much as 140 Pro Biafra activists
and other members of the public who converged to mark their heroes day were
massacred; with over 130 others terminally shot and injured. Pieces of evidence
abound.
As if that was not enough, the
security forces particularly the DSS have gone further to clamp down surviving
IPOB activists in Nigeria leading to indiscriminate raiding of their homes and
sleeping abodes particularly in the dead of the night or hours of the blue law.
Those abducted in their sleep by DSS are detained incommunicado for months
without trial. Because the DSS finds nothing incriminating on them on account
of their group’s nonviolence stance, the authorities of the DSS are strongly believed to routinely torture
them to self-criminate themselves of being “terrorists”; a stigma DSS uses to
hunt and abduct them.
Some of those abducted are shot
and wounded at sight before they are taken away and detained incommunicado for
months without trial. Recently, a list of wanted IPOB activists compiled by the
DSS in Abuja was leaked to the media; containing 45 IPOB activists and their
wives who reside locally and internationally. For instance, the nursing mother
and wife of detained IPOB leader, Mrs Uchechi Kanu was among those in the DSS
wanted list. The link below contains the referenced wanted list: http://www.igberetvnews.com/67487.
http://www.otimestv.com/2016/09/shocking-sss-releases-list-of-wanted.html.
IPOB Activists Being Held Without Trial: (1) Comrade Chidiebere Onwudiwe: A Mechanical Engineer by
training, he is the National Coordinator of IPOB in Nigeria. He was arrested in
his sleep by DSS operatives in the late night of 22nd of June 2016, in
Rumukurushi area of Port Harcourt, Rivers State in South-south Nigeria. Comrade
Chidiebere Onwudiwe has been held incommunicado and denied access to his family
and lawyers till date; a period of 100 days. On 30th of July 2016,
the authorities of DSS issued a public statement, labeling him “a terrorist”;
claiming that “he was arrested while planning to bomb Computer Village in
Lagos”; a claim strongly resisted by human rights groups and the media. Mr.
Chidiebere Onwudiwe is not only unarmed and nonviolent, but he is also well
known to local and international human rights groups and media as well as
members of the diplomatic community. Till date, the authorities of the DSS have
neither granted him administrative bail nor charged to court. It is most likely
he is undergoing intense torture to self-implicate himself and admit being “a
terrorist” as he was so labeled. The link below contains the DSS statement
declaring him “a terrorist”: http://www.sirkenayo.com/dss-uncovers-plans-by-ipob-members-others-to-bomb-computer-village-lagos-attack-worship-centres-parks/
(2) Comrade Justice O. Udeh: An IPOB official in Aba, Abia State,
Southeast Nigeria. He was abducted in his sleep by the DSS operatives in the
late night of 13th of July 2016 in a place he had gone to pass a
night near Port Harcourt in Rivers State. He has been held incommunicado and
denied access to his family and lawyers since then; a period of 80 days. He is
strongly believed to be undergoing intense torture to force him admit falsely of
being a “terrorist”. Till date, over 80days in DSS custody; he has neither been
charged to court nor granted administrative bail.
(3) Comrade Sunday Chuks Obasi: An IPOB official in Nnewi, Anambra
State, Southeast Nigeria and coordinator of the Nnewi-Ichi IPOB Unit; he was
abducted in his sleep by DSS in the late night of 16th of August
2016 in his Amuwo-Nnewi residence, after he was trailed from Port Harcourt in
Rivers State. He was shot at his two legs before being abducted by the DSS
operatives. He has been held incommunicado and denied access to his family and
lawyers till date, a period of 46 days; he has remained in the DSS custody
without trial/charge or administrative bail. His gunshot wounds and general
health conditions have also remained sketchy till date.
(4) Comrade
Ikechukwu Ugwuoha: He is the Abia
State Coordinator of IPOB and was arrested barely over two weeks after he,
alongside 19 other IPOB members including six married women were released from
the Aba Prisons on 11th of August 2016 after remanded for over five
months for their involvement in the 9th of February 2016 prayer
rallies in the Premises of the National High School, Aba, during which soldiers
stormed the venue and opened fire, killing 22 of them. Comrade Ugwuoha,
alongside four others was trailed from Gwagwalada area of Abuja by DSS where
they had gone to see the detained leader of IPOB, Mr. Nnamdi Kanu at Kuje
Prison.
Their commercial bus was trailed
to Ugba Junction near Aba in Abia State and ambushed at about 7.30am on 26th
of August 2016 by the operatives of the DSS, supported by soldiers and police.
Comrade Ugwuoha, alongside four others, was moved to the temporary headquarters
of the 144 Battalion of the Nigerian Army and tortured for hours before they
were taken to the Umuahia Directorate of the DSS; from where they were moved to
the Abuja Headquarters of the DSS and detained incommunicado till date. He has
been held for 36 days without trial or administrative bail.
(5) Comrade Ugochukwu Asochukwu: He was arrested alongside Comrade
Ikechukwu Ugwuoha and three others by the DSS on 26th of August 2016
and held incommunicado without trial or administrative bail; a period of 36
days.
(6) Comrade Sunday J. Okafor: He was arrested alongside Comrade
Ikechukwu Ugwuoha and three others by the DSS on 26th of August 2016
and held incommunicado without trial or
administrative bail; a period of 36 days.
(7) Comrade Ekene Onuoha: He was arrested alongside Comrade Ikechukwu
Ugwuoha and three others by the DSS on 26th of August 2016 and held
incommunicado without trial or administrative bail; a period of 36 days.
(8) Comrade Joseph Okorie: He was arrested alongside Comrade Ikechukwu
Ugwuoha and three others by the DSS on 26th of August 2016 and held
incommunicado without trial or administrative bail; a period of 36 days.
Other names contained in the DSS
list of wanted IPOB activists are: Sunday
Onyekachi, Ogechukwu Obiorah, Ann Okafor, Amaechi Sunday Kanu (Sheffield, UK),
Dickson Ekene, Ndidi Ojukwu, Emma Powerful, Emma Nmezu, Uchechi Kanu (London,
UK: Nnamdi Kanu’s wife and nursing mother), Sidney Okoli (Mollorca, Spaiin),
Andy Obeche, Ifriam Ezeiwu, Chukwuemeka
Mfon, Ikenna Sunday Egono, Chijioke Ekwueme, Godwin Osinachi, Udoka Amarachi
(Dortmund, Germany), Uche Martin Doludo, Nduka Enuma, Ambrose Ero and Clifford
Mbamere.
Others
are: Andy Obina Okafor, Stephen Oko (Uk), Onyeka Joseph, Eric, Dike Benson,
Uche Emmanuel Uche, Udoka Okechukwu David, Martins (Austria), Michael Chidi
Okafor, Daniel Ifeanyi (USA), Roland Abumere, Kenneth Uche Opara, Emenike
Anyanwu, Obinwanne Markson Chukwujekwu, Chukwu I Ojiugo, Ezinwanne Mba, Jeff
Amechi, etc. The link to the DSS list of wanted IPOB members is contained here:
http://www.otimestv.com/2016/09/shocking-sss-releases-list-of-wanted.html#more.
As we write, the authorities of
the DSS have refused to communicate the families and lawyers of the detained
citizens as it concerns offences under which they are being held without trial
or put them on notice of any court process undertaken. As a matter of fact,
none of the detained citizens has been arraigned or put on trial till date. No
records of court remands have been traced to any court in Nigeria.
Dear AGF, by the combined
provisions of Sections 150 and 174 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria 1999, as amended in 2011, you are not only “the Chief Law Officer of
the Federation”, but also “the Chief Prosecuting Officer of the Federation”.
That is to say that it is your duty, mandatorily and constitutionally, to
ensure that “all officers of the law” in Nigeria are compelled at all times in
accordance with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution to conform to, observe,
apply and obey the provisions of the 1999 Constitution in the course of
processing citizens taken into custody on suspicion of committing criminal
offences. This is more so when the Constitution in its Section 174 (3) firmly
directs you to “prevent abuse of legal process” and give due regard to public
interest and interest of justice in the course of carrying out your duties and
exercising your constitutional powers.
As you are aware Sir, Section 3 of Nigeria’s Criminal Code Act of 2004 clearly provides for three categories of offense in
Nigeria. They are: felony, misdemeanour and simple offences. The
Criminal Code Act further defines felony as any offence which is declared
by law to be a felony, or is punishable, without proof of previous conviction,
with death or with imprisonment for three years or more.
On the other hands, Misdemeanour offences attract
judicial punishment of maximum of three years imprisonment or less; and Simple
offences such as strict and statutory liability offences attract a maximum of
six months imprisonment or less. In other words, crimes in Nigeria are
categorized according to their sentencing categories.
As you are
further aware Sir, for a crime or an offense (i.e. felony and
misdemeanor) to be alleged to have been committed by a citizen in any part
of the world including Nigeria, there must be alleged guilty act (actus reus) and
alleged guilty mind (mens rea). Also for an offense to be truly called offense
or a crime truly called crime; there must be presence of seven
elements of crime: harm, legality, actus reus, mens rea, causation, concurrence
and punishment. For an act or omission to be called a
crime or an offense, there must be concurrence and concordance of actus
reus and mens rea. In other words, where there is criminal intention (mens rea) without
criminal
act (actus reus), an offense has not been committed; except in strict
and statutory liability offenses such as traffic offenses; where
only guilty
act (actus rea) is judicially required to secure conviction or
sanction.
By Section 36 (8) of the 1999
Constitution: no person shall be held to
be guilty of an offence on account of any act or omission that did not, at the
time it took place, constitute such an offence, and no penalty shall be imposed
for any criminal offence heavier than the penalty in force at the time the
offence was committed.
By Section 36 (12) of the same
Constitution: subject as otherwise
provided by this Constitution, a person shall not be convicted of a criminal
offence unless that offence is defined and penalty therefore is prescribed in a written law, such as an Act of the
National Assembly or a Law of a State.
Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution (right to freedom from
discrimination) expressly and inexcusably forbids your public office and
subordinate processors (i.e. Police and DSS) of accused, arrested and detained
citizens in Nigeria (i.e. detained IPOB activists) from processing or detaining
their captives on grounds of their ethnic group, place of origin, religion, sex,
class or political opinion.
Very importantly Sir, the
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, as amended in 2011 is supreme and above all other laws,
authorities and persons. It is also the
general overseer of all other laws in the country. The inferiority of all other laws in Nigeria to the 1999
Constitution is expressly contained in Section 315 of the 1999 Constitution,
which clearly directs as follows: subject
to the provisions of this Constitution, an existing law (i.e. an Act of the
National Assembly, a Law of a State, a Decree, or an Edith) shall have effect
with such modifications as may be necessary to bring it into conformity with
the provisions of this Constitution.
The supremacy of the 1999 Constitution over all other laws, authorities
and persons is expressly contained in its Section 1 (1), which provides as
follows: this Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have
binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of
Nigeria. The Constitution further directs in its Section 1 (3) that if any other law is inconsistent with the
provisions of the Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other
law shall to extent of the inconsistency be void.
Honourable AGF Sir, it plainly
follows that (1) where an Act of National Assembly rises in conflict with
provisions of the 1999 Constitution, the 1999 Constitution expressly prevails
and the said Act fails woefully; (2) where an existing military decree rises in
conflict with an Act of the National Assembly and the 1999 Constitution, the
former fails woefully on two fronts; and where a Law of a State or an Edith
rises in conflict with an Act of the National Assembly and the 1999
Constitution, the former fails woefully on two fronts as well.
For the avoidance of doubt Sir,
Section 4 (5) of the 1999 Constitution expressly holds as follows: if any Law enacted by the House of Assembly
of a State is inconsistent with any law validly made by the National Assembly,
the law made by the National Assembly shall prevail and that other Law shall to
the extent of the inconsistency be void. In the area of decided cases, it is not different. For
instance, in the Supreme Court of Nigeria’s landmark verdict in: Abacha
and Others v Fawehinmi (2001) AHRLR 172 (NgSC 2000); it was declared that “the African Charter on Human & Peoples
Rights (ACHPR) is superior to any ordinary
legislation in Nigeria, but subject to the 1999 Constitution”.
From the above extensive
constitutional and statutory citations Sir, it is elementarily clear that
Nigeria’s body of laws contain clear procedures and processes within modern democratic
practices for processing citizens accused of committing crimes of whatever
category; yet those charged with the application of these laws have chosen to
observe them in breach with reckless abandon and under your watch; to the
extent that the hallowed supremacy of the Constitution has been grossly
undermined and torn to shreds by the authorities of the DSS with your public
office watching and doing nothing.As it is expressly observed from the above
citations, the Nigeria’s body of criminal laws totally forbid trumped charges or accusations or
trial-by-ordeal; yet the authorities of the DSS are applying them with
reckless abandon particularly in the instant case.
By Nigeria’s body of criminal
laws and the 1999 Constitution, citizens accused, arrested and detained on
suspicion of committing misdemeanours shall not be detained for more than 48hrs
without trial and those accused, arrested and detained on suspicion of
committing offences (i.e. treason, treasonable felony, terrorism, asportation (“kidnapping”),
armed robbery, etc) involving grievous punishments (i.e. death penalty, life
imprisonment or 14yrs imprisonment and above) shall not be detained without
trial or court bail for more than 60days.
If they are accused, arrested and
detained without trial for 90days, the Constitution directs for their discharge
on assumption that “they have no case to answer or that the State has no
indictable evidence to try then”. The long period of detention in the latter
instance is designed to give criminal investigators enough time considering the
gravity of the offences alleged to have been committed; provided such detention
is sanctioned by a law court with exhaustible period of time.
For the avoidance of doubt Sir,
Section 35 (4) (a) (b) of the 1999 Constitution (right to personal liberty); clearly
states as follows: any person
who is arrested or detained in accordance with sub section 1 (c) of this
section shall be brought before a court within a reasonable time, and if he is
not tried within a period of:
(a)
two months from the date of his arrest or detention in the case of a person who
is in custody or is not entitled to bail;
(b) three months from the date of his arrest or detention in
the case of a person who has been released on bail, he shall (without prejudice
to any other further proceedings that may be brought against him) be released
either unconditionally or upon such conditions as are reasonably necessary to
ensure that he appears for trial at a later date”.
The literal meaning of the above is
that no citizen shall be held or detained by any policing or securitization
agency in Nigeria continuously for 60days without charge or trial or bail; and
if such citizen is granted bail, but not tried within 90days, he or she shall
be discharged of the accusation.
Further Sir, Sections 293, 294, 295 and 296 of
the Administration of the Criminal Justice Act, 2015, are our further
guide in the instant case. Your attention is drawn to its Detention Limits
of Arrested Citizens in Part 30. Section 293 (1) provides as follows:
A suspect arrested for an offence which a Magistrate Court has no jurisdiction
to try shall within a reasonable time of arrest be brought before a Magistrate
Court for remand.
Section 293 (2): An
application for remand under this section shall be made ex parte and shall:
(a) Be made in the prescribed
“Report and Request for Remand Form”, as contained in Form 8, in the First
Schedule to this Act; and
(b) Be verified on oath and
contain reasons for the remand request.
Section 294 (1): Where
the Court, after examining the reason and for the request for remand in
accordance with the provisions of Section 293 of this Act, is satisfied that
there is probable cause to remand the suspect pending the receipt of a copy of
legal advice from the Attorney General of the Federation and arraignment of the
suspect before the appropriate Court, as the case may be, may remand the
suspect in custody.
Section 294(2): In
considering whether “probable cause” has been established for the remand of a
suspect pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, the Court may take into
consideration the following:
(a) The nature and seriousness
of the alleged offence;
(b) Reasonable grounds to
suspect that the suspect has been involved in the commission of the alleged
offence;
(c) Reasonable grounds for believing
that the suspect may abscond or commit further offence where he is not
committed to custody; and
(d) Any other circumstance of
the case that justifies the request for remand.
Section 295: The Court
may, in considering an application for remand brought under Section 293 of this
Act, grant bail to the suspect brought before it, taking into consideration the
provisions of Sections 158 to 188 of this Act relating to bail.
Section 296(1): Where
an order of the remand of a suspect is made pursuant to Section 293 of this
Act, the order shall be for a period not exceeding fourteen days in the first
instance, and the case shall be returnable within the same period.
Section 296 (2): Where,
on application in writing, good cause is shown why there should be an extension
of the remand period, the Court may make an order for further remand of the
suspect for a period not exceeding fourteen days and make proceedings
returnable within the same period.
Section 296 (3): Where
the suspect is still in custody on remand at the expiration of the period
provided for under subsection (1) or (2)
of this section, the Court may, on application of the suspect, grant
bail in accordance with the provisions of Sections 158 to 188 of this Act
relating to bail.
Section 296 (4): At
the expiration of remand order made pursuant to subsection (1) or (2) of this
section, and where the suspect is still remanded with his trial having not
commenced, or charge having not been filed at the relevant court having jurisdiction,
the court shall issue a hearing notice:
(a)
The Inspector General of Police (IGP) and the Attorney General of
the Federation (AGF); or
(b)
The Commissioner of Police of a State (CP) or of that of FCT or the
AGF as case may be; or
(c)
Any relevant authority in whose custody the suspect is or at whose
instance the suspect is remanded, and adjourn the matter within a period not
exceeding fourteen days of the expiration of the period of the remand order
made under subsection (1) or (2) of this section, to enquire as to the position
of the case and for the IGP or the CP and the AGF to show cause why the suspect
remanded should not be unconditionally released.
Section 296 (5): Where
the IGP or the CP and the AGF show good cause pursuant to subsection (4) of
this Section and make a request to that effect, the Court:
(a)
May extend the remand of the suspect for a final period not
exceeding fourteen days for the suspect to be arraigned for trial before an
appropriate court; and
(b)
Shall make the case returnable within the said period of fourteen
days from the date the hearing notice was issued pursuant to subsection (4) of
this section.
Section 296 (6): Where
good cause is not shown for the continued remand of the suspect pursuant to
subsection (4) of this section, or where the suspect is still on remand custody
after the expiration of the extended period under subsection (5), the Court
shall, with or without an application to that effect, forthwith discharge the
suspect and the suspect shall be immediately released from custody.
Section 296 (7): No
further application for remand shall be entertained by any court after the
proceeding in subsection (6) of this section.
Sir, the literal meaning of the
above is that no citizen arrested of any grievous crime, whether true or false,
shall be detained in any detention custody in Nigeria without a valid court
remand grounded in legitimate legal process and fair hearing (i.e. putting the
detained citizen’s lawyers and family on notice). The maximum period allowed
for such detention for the purpose of continuation and conclusion of
investigation is a total of 56days segmented into “four-two weeks” and that if
at the expiration of the said maximum of 56days, the citizen is not put on
trial before a High Court of a State, a High Court of the FCT or a Federal High
Court, he or she shall be discharged by the Court that issued the remand order
and no further application for remand
shall be entertained by any court in Nigeria.
It is therefore shocking as to
where the authorities of the DSS derive powers and authority to arrest and
detain citizens for over 60days without trial or administrative bail. The
source of powers under which the DSS detains citizens incommunicado without
access to their lawyers and families is also unknown to the 1999 Constitution.
The Constitution in its Section 36 (5) (6) guarantees the arrested and detained
citizens their inalienable rights to fair hearing including access to their
lawyers and families and presumption of innocence until found guilty by a court
of competent jurisdiction.
Even if the authorities of the
DSS claim that Comrade Chidibere Onwudiwe and his colleagues are being held
incommunicado under the infamous Section 27 (1) of the Terrorism Prevention Act of 2011
as amended in 2013, which unconstitutionally provides as follows:
the Court may, pursuant to an exparte application, grant an order for the
detention of a suspect under this Act for a period not exceeding 90 days
subject to renewal for a similar period until the conclusion of the
investigation and prosecution of the matter that led to the arrest and
detention is dispensed with; it is
dead on arrival.
This is on account of clear provisions of
Section 1 (3) of the 1999 Constitution, which directs that: if any other law is inconsistent with the
provisions of the Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other
law shall to extent of the inconsistency be void. The infamous provision
under reference is also grossly inconsistent with Section 35 (4) (a) (b) of the
Constitution as well as Section 293, 294, 295 and 296 of the Administration of
the Criminal Justice Act, 2015.
Our Demands:
1.
In view of the fact that
Comrades Chidiebere Onwudiwe and Justice O. Udeh are no longer triable having
being arrested on 22nd June and 13th July 2016 and
detained incommunicado for 100days and 80days respectively; your public office
is called upon to direct the authorities of the DSS to release them
unconditionally and discharge them as well. Your office should also ensure that
they are not tried in any court in Nigeria and specifically file Nolle Prosequi
(we shall no longer prosecute) application where reverse is the case.
2.
Direct the authorities of
the DSS to free other IPOB members held in their custody including Comrades Sunday
Chuks Obasi, Ikechukwu Igwuoha, Ugochukwu Asochukwu, Sunday J. Okafor, Ekene
Onuoha and Joseph Okorie and ensure cessation of the DSS clamp down on IPOB
activists across the country particularly in the Southeast and the South-south
of Nigeria.
3.
File Nolle Prosequi (we
shall no longer prosecute) applications in any court in Nigeria where Pro
Biafra associated cases are pending and get over 100 Pro Biafra activists
languishing in various prisons and other detention facilities freed
unconditionally.
4.
Advice the authorities of
DSS, Army and Police against criminalizing and stigmatizing constitutional
rights to peaceful assemblies and associated constitutional liberties in Nigeria
and channel their energies towards curbing the ceaseless menaces of armed opposition
groups like Boko Haram and Fulani terror
groups and other violent entities in Nigeria.
5.
Direct all the security and
law enforcement agencies in Nigeria to adhere strictly to the provisions of the
1999 Constitution and the Principles of the Rule of Law in processing their
arrested and detained citizens and ensure that their detainees are not tortured
or killed in custody or detained for
periods not allowed by the Constitution.
6.
Direct same to stop all
forms of indiscriminate arrest and detention of Nigerians without trial and
ensure they refrain from shooting citizens who are unarmed and nonviolent at
the point of their arrest or in the course of exercise of their
constitutionally guaranteed liberties such as rights to personal liberty,
movement, expression, association, assembly, etc.
7.
Direct same to ensure at
all times that their detainees are allowed access to their families and lawyers
as well as ensuring that they are detained under good sanitary conditions and
giving them access to proper medication.
8.
Identify all inconsistent
and incoherent laws insulting and rubbing shoulders with scared provisions of
the 1999 Constitution such as infamous Section 27 (1) of the Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2011, as amended in 2013 and forward them to the National
Assembly by way of Executive sponsored Bills to get them amended or modified in
accordance with Section 315 (1) of the 1999 Constitution.
Note Sir:
This open letter is communicated to you through your personal email as well as
your office email.
Thank You.
Yours in the Service to Humanity:
(a)Emeka Umeagbalasi, B.Sc., Criminology & Security Studies; M.Sc.
(c), Peace & Conflict Studies
Board Chairman, International Society for Civil Liberties & the
Rule of Law-INTERSOCIETY
Mobile Line: +2348174090052
Email: info@intersociety-ng.org
Website: www.intersociety-ng.org
(b)Obianuju Igboeli, Esq., LLB, BL; LLM (c)
Head, Civil Liberties & Rule of Law Program
Mobile Line: +2348034186332
(c)Chinwe Umeche, Esq., LLB, BL
Mobile Line: +2347013238673
Head, Democracy & Good Governance Program
Post A Comment:
0 comments: