Read full details of Nnamdi Kanu's case against Nigeria at the ECOWAS Court and why Nigeria is in serious trouble

Read full details of Nnamdi Kanu's case against Nigeria at the ECOWAS Court and why Nigeria is in a deep mess

Nigeria is in for serious trouble having breached  many of her obligations under the treaty of the ECOWAS, which signed to, with illegal arrest and detention of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Read below the full details of the Kanu's case against Nigeria and a brief on ECOWAS Community Court of Justice. It shows that Nigeria has thoroughly breached the ECOWAS treaty.

IN THE COMMUNITY COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE ECONOMIC

COMMUNITY OF WEST AFRICAN STATES (ECOWAS)

BETWEEN

NNAMDI KANU.......................................................................PLAINTIFF

1. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

2. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION DEFENDANTS & MINISTRY OF JUSTICE

3. DIRECTOR GENERAL, STATE SECURITY SERVICE

A. ARTICLES 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, AND 20 OF THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLE’S RIGHTS;

B. ARTICLES 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 12, 22 AND 26 OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS;

C. ARTICLES 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, 13, 17, 20, 21 AND 25 OF THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS;

D. ARTICLE 22 PARAGRAPH 1, OF THE COVENANT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS;

E. RESOLUTION 2625 (XXV) OF THE UNITED NATION CHARTER OF 1970.

A. NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PLAINTIFF

1. The Plaintiff is a Nigerian Citizen as well as British Citizen who reside at 30 Sandlings Close, Pilkington Road, London SE15 3SY England, United Kingdom.

B. DESIGNATION OF THE DEFENDANTS

1. The 1st Defendant is the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

2. The 2nd Defendant is the Chief Law Officer of the Federation.

3. The 3rd Defendant is the Head of State Security Services.

C. SUBJECT MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS

1. Violation by the Defendants of the Human Rights of the Plaintiff to life, to personal integrity, to privacy, to fair trial, to freedom of movement, to freedom of expression, to personal liberty, to freedom of Association, to private property, right to existence and right to self determination guaranteed by Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Article 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 12, 22, and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12, 13, 17, 20, 21 and 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 22 paragraph 1 of the Covenant of the League of Nations and Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nation Charter of 1970.

D. FACTS

i. The Federal Republic of Nigeria is a signatory to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other similar regional and International Human Rights Treaties.

ii. The Federal Republic of Nigeria is also a signatory to the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States dated 24th July, 1993.

iii. Nigeria ratified both the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in October, 1993. Nigeria ratified the African Charter on 22nd July, 1983.

iv. The Plaintiff is the Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra and director of Radio Biafra, a legitimate body duly registered under the relevant regulatory Laws in the United Kingdom and under the United Nation regulation.

v. The 1st Defendant is the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

vi. The 2nd Defendant is the Chief Law Officer of the Federation.

vii. The 3rd Defendant is the Head of Nigerian State security Agencies.

E. NARRATION OF FACTS BY THE PLAINTIFF

i. The suit is brought by the Plaintiff against the Federal Republic of Nigeria, a member of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and a state party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and other related Human Rights Treaties.

ii. Radio Biafra is registered transmission station, run from London and propagates its frequencies all over the world.

iii. The Plaintiff was arrested in Lagos on the 14th day of October, 2015, by the operatives of the 3rd Defendant on the instigation of the 1st Defendant and upon his arrival from the United Kingdom.

iv. Upon his arrest, he was subjected to the most inhuman and degrading treatment by the personnel of the 3rd Defendant, as he was excessively tortured, assaulted, humiliated, handcuffed and all his valuables confiscated by the 3rd Defendant’s strike force, who obviously were acting a specific script.

v. Following public outcry and International condemnation that greeted the unlawful, illegal and unjust arrest of the Plaintiff, the personnel of the 3rd Defendant (Department of State services) hurriedly transferred him to their Abuja National Headquarters for further interrogation, torture and onward detention.

vi. On the 19th day of October 2015, the 3rd Defendant reluctantly arraigned the Plaintiff at a Chief Magistrate Court of the Federal Capital Territory (before Hon. A.U Shuaibu) on conjectured and frivolous allegation of Criminal conspiracy, managing and belonging to an unlawful society and criminal intimidation.

vii. The Honourable presiding Chief Magistrate after listening to the oral application for the bail of the Plaintiff accordingly granted him bail on terms and conditions that were spelt out in the Ruling of the Court delivered same day.

viii. The terms and conditions given for the bail of the Plaintiff was promptly satisfied, but the 3rd Defendant, neglected and flagrantly disobeyed this order, and continued to detain the Plaintiff who was being kept in the most dreaded detention centre of the 3rd Defendant, where the Plaintiff shared common cell with violent criminals and notorious terrorists members.

ix. Desperate attempt by the 3rd Defendant to obtain an obnoxious but repressive Order from the Federal High Court Abuja, that will legitimize the Plaintiff’s further detention in their facility for another period of 90 days was strongly challenged.

x. Ex-parte Order obtained on the 15th day of November, 2015 by the 3rd Defendant in the Federal High Court Abuja to detain the Plaintiff for another period of 90 days, was promptly vacated by the same Judge Hon. Justice A.f.A Ademola, upon being presented with the facts and history of the 3rd Defendant’s affront to Judicial Orders. The Judge proceeded to direct the 3rd Defendant to release the Plaintiff unconditionally without further ado.

xi. The 3rd Defendant still failed to obey the order of the Court of competent jurisdiction directing the immediate release of the Plaintiff.

xii. Cumulatively, the Plaintiff was illegally, and unjustly detained, incarcerated, tortured and assaulted by the 3rd Defendant from the 14th day of October, 2015 to the 20 and still being held in the Defendants captivity, based on the most unfounded, frivolous and bogus charges preferred against the Plaintiff, which was only read to the Plaintiff on the 20th day of January, 2016, after spending over 100 days in custody, and despite lawful orders of the Court directing his unconditional release.

xiii. During the December 2015 presidential media chat of the 1st Defendant, aired in both International and local media, the 1st Defendant announced to the whole world that the Plaintiff cannot be granted bail, a clear indication that the Nigerian judiciary is under his whims and caprices as far as this matter is concerned.

xiv. The Plaintiff who is a political prisoner is being subjected to this life threatening and most bizarre experience because he is the Leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra, and director of Radio Biafra.

xv. The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is an organization that is legitimately registered under the United Nation’s relevant regulation and enjoys the recognition of the United Nation.

xvi. The activities of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) are guided by the United Nation Charter on the Right to Self Determination, which also provides a legal framework to their legitimate agitation of Biafra state.

xvii. The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is also duly registered in United Kingdom where its headquarters is situated.

xviii. The Plaintiff contends that the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is an organization that pursues the specific right of the Indigenous People of Biafra to seek for their self-determination in accordance with the United Nation Charter, African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other relevant International Convention and Treaties to which Nigeria is a signatory.

xix. The Plaintiff contends that his illegal and unlawful detention incarceration, torture and seizure of his valuables by the 3rd Defendant is in flagrant disobedience to various orders of Court of competent jurisdiction, a gross violation of his human rights as clearly provided for under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, United Nation General Assembly Resolution on the Rights to Self Determination and other International Conventions to which Nigeria is a signatory.

xx. The Plaintiff contends that in brutal response to various civil but peaceful protests organized by the members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), particularly in Aba, Abia State, Nigeria, in total rejection of his continued illegal detention and incarceration, the 1st Defendant through his chain of commands, directed heavy gun wielding combined team of Military personnel and Police to shoot at sight the defenseless, unarmed and innocent citizens.

xxi. The Plaintiff states that over a hundred members of the Indigenous People of Biafra were gunned down at various locations in Aba, Abia State on the 29th day of January, 2016; 9 day of February, 2016 and 19th day of February, 2016.

xxii. The Plaintiff states that Amnesty International has embarked on aggressive and extensive investigation of this heinous crime against humanity and their preliminary findings/reports had condemned the unwholesome activities of the combined team of military and police personnel who perpetrated this crime.

xxiii. The Nigerian Government has continued to suppress, maim, arrest and kill the members of the Indigenous People of Biafra in clear violation of their Human Rights.

xxiv. The Plaintiff contends that the above highlighted Human Rights, Social and Cultural Rights as well as Civil and Political Rights are recognized and guaranteed by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other related Human Rights Treaties to which Nigeria is a state party.

xxv. Given other regional Human Rights Jurisprudence in this field, the Plaintiff contends that the ECOWAS Court can play a significant role in emphasizing on the protection of the Human

Rights of the Plaintiff.

F. SUMMARY OF PLEAS IN LAW APPLICABILITY OF THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS

Article 4 of the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), 1993 provides for the applicability of the provisions of the Africa Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right to Member States of the ECOWAS as follows:

The High contracting parties in pursuits of the objective stated in Article 3 of this Treaty, solemnly affirm and declare their adherence to the following principle;

4(g) ... recognition, promotion and protection of Human Peoples’ Right in accordance with the provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

WHEREAS the Federal Republic of Nigeria has ratified and adopted the provisions of Article 1 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Right which provides that;

Article 2 of the Charter provides that;

Article 3 of the Charter provides that;

Article 4 of the Charter provides that;

Article 5 of the Charter provides that;

Article 6 of the Charter provides that;

Article 9 of the Charter provides that;

Article 10 of the Charter provides that:

Article 11 of the Charter provides that;

Article 14 of the Charter proves that;

Article 20 of the Charter provides the;

It is hereby submitted that under the combined Articles 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights which Nigeria is a signatory, the Defendants have individually and collectively violated the Human Rights of the Plaintiff to life, to dignity of human person, to judicial guarantee, to fair trial, to private property, to freedom of expression, to liberty, to movement, to association, to Assembly and to self determination.

It is submitted further that the detention of the Plaintiff by the Defendants, in the most inhuman conditions and dreaded Detention Centre of the 3rd Defendant, torture, incarceration, assault, for over a period of hundred days, even in flagrant disobedience to all orders of the Court of competent jurisdiction directing his release, the killing of the unarmed members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) by the Defendants’ agents, amount to serious but gross breaches of the obligations and commitment of the Nigerian Government under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the International Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and United Nation General Assembly Resolution 2625 (XXV), of the United Nation Charter of 1970.

These International Instruments establish the duty of the States parties including Nigerian Government to respect and ensure respect for the rights that they protect. The Plaintiff contends that these human rights have been violated by the Defendants and their agents by a set of actions and omissions.

The Plaintiff contends that freedom of assembly, movement, expression, liberty and self-determination as clearly provided under the African Charter above enumerated are essential to the condition of free development of a person, and consist inter-alia of the right of those who are legally within a State to move freely, express their opinion, protest against unjust acts of the oppressors within the State.

The members of the Indigenous People of Biafra being led by the Plaintiff are presently exposed to a much higher level of vulnerability in the hands of the armed forces specifically detailed by the Defendants to ensure total annihilation of the members of the Indigenous People of Biafra, at all cost and by any means, this action of the Defendants and their agents entails a grave, massive and systematic violation of the fundamental rights of the Indigenous People of Biafra including the Plaintiff, who had been arbitrarily held in captivity by the Defendants.

In totality, the Plaintiff contends that the Nigerian Government has not only failed or neglected to prevent the violation of the Human Rights of the Plaintiff, but had continued to wantonly violate the human rights of the Plaintiff through the unjust, illegal and unlawful incarceration of the Plaintiff, in clear contradiction to their obligation to protect and guarantee the existence/enjoyment of the human rights of the Plaintiff as clearly mandated under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Covenant of the League of Nations, and Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nation Charter of 1970.

G. ORDERS SOUGHT BY PLAINTIFF

The Plaintiff therefore is asking the ECOWAS Court of Justice for the following Reliefs:

1. A DECLARATION that the arrest and detention of the Plaintiff since the 14th day of October, 2015, torture and his incarceration in the Defendants detention Centre in flagrant disobedience to several Orders of Court of competent jurisdiction directing his unconditional release, is unlawful, as it constitutes serious breaches of Nigerian’s human rights obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and other International Human Rights Treaties to which Nigeria is a State party.

2. A DECLARATION that the killing, violent attacks, intimidation, arrest and incarceration of the unarmed Plaintiff’s supporters, members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) by the Defendants and their agents is unlawful and a crime against humanity.

3. A DECLARATION that the continued detention of the Plaintiff on  conjectured, frivolous and empty charge filed after over hundred days of his illegal and unjust incarceration in the custody of the 3rd Defendant, is unlawful, illegal and a gross breach of the Plaintiff’s human rights as recognized by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and other International Conventions to which Nigeria is a signatory.

4. AN ORDER finding the Nigerian Government responsible for these human rights violations.

5. AN ORDER directing the Nigerian Government to further release the Plaintiff, held in their captivity, unconditionally.

6. AN ORDER directing the Defendants and or/their agents individually and/or collectively to respect, protect and promote the Plaintiff’s human rights to life, to liberty, to freedom of movement, to private property, to assembly, to fair trial, to judicial guarantees, to freedom of expression and to self-determination.

7. AN ORDER directing the Defendants and/or their agents individually to release forthwith to the Plaintiff all his personal belongings confiscated at the point of his arrest.

8. AN ORDER directing the Defendants and/or their agents individually and/or collectively to pay adequate monetary compensation of $800 million (US Dollars) to the Plaintiff for the gross violation of his human rights, the subject matter of this suit, and to provide other forms of reparation, which may take the form of restitution, satisfaction or guarantees of non-repetition, and other forms of reparation that the Honourable Court may deem fit to grant.

9. NATURE OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT DOCUMENTARY & OTHERS:

1. The African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights.

2. UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural

3. UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Rights.

4. Economic Community of West African states (ECOWAS) Revised

Treaty dated 24th July 1993.

5. Resolution 2625 (XXV) of the United Nation Charter of 1991.

6. Rulings of Courts of competent jurisdiction and orders made fragrantly disobeyed.

7. Photographs and video clips showing the genocidal massacre directing the Defendants to release the Plaintiff which were all and unlawful killing of the Plaintiff’s supporters (Indigenous People of Biafra members) during a civil protest in Aba, the Abia State Capital in Nigeria.

DATED THIS 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2016

PLAINTIFF’S SOLICITORS ADDRESS FOR SERVICE AT THE SEAT OF COURT

I.C EJIOFOR & CO 

SUITE 122, ANBEEZ PLAZZA

FIRST FLOOR

RIGHT WING,

OPPOSITE OLD CAC HEADQUARTERS

PLOT 2121 NDOLA CRESCENT

WUSE ZONE 5 ABUJA.

PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT SERVICES

HON. IFEANYI EJIOFOR ESQ.

CHINWE C. UMECHE (MISS)

SADIYA AHMED

SERVICE MAY ALSO BE EFFECTED ON THE PLAINTIFF’S SOLICITORS, BY ANY TECHNICAL MEANS OF COMMUNICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH

ARTICLE 33

RULE 2 

THROUGH OUR EMAIL: iclawfirm@yahoo.com

FOR SERVICE ON THE DEFENDANTS:

1. THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

C/O ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION

FEDERAL MINISTRY OF JUSTICE ABUJA.

2. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION

FEDERAL MINISTRY OF JUSTICE, ABUJA.

3. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL STATE

SECURITY SERVICE

NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS

ASO-VILLA

ABUJA.

Brief about ECOWAS Community Court of Justice

CREATION
The Community Court of Justice was created pursuant to the provisions of Articles 6 and 15 of the Revised Treaty of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).
Its Organisational framework, functioning mechanism, powers, and procedure applicable before it are set out in Protocol A/P1/7/91 of 6 July 1991, Supplementary Protocol A/SP.1/01/05 of 19 January 2005, Supplementary Protocol A/SP.2/06/06 of 14 June 2006, Regulation of 3 June 2002, and Supplementary Regulation C/REG.2/06/06 of 13 June 2006.

COMPOSITION
The Court is composed of seven (7) independent Judges who are persons of high moral character, appointed by the Authority of Heads of State of Government, from nationals of Member States, for a four-year term of office, upon recommendation of the Community Judicial council.

MANDATE
The Mandate of the Court is to ensure the observance of law and of the principles of equity and in the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Revised Treat and all other subsidiary legal instruments adopted by Community.

JUSRISDICTION
Advisory Jurisdiction
The Court gives legal advisory opinion on any matter that requires interpretation of the Community text.

Contentious Jurisdiction

• The Court examines cases of failure by Member States to honour their obligations under the Community law;
• The Court has competence to adjudicate on any dispute relating to the interpretation and application of acts of the Community;
• The Court adjudicates in disputes between Institutions of the Community and their officials;
• The Court has power to handle cases dealing with liability for or against the Community;
• The Court has jurisdiction to determine cases of violation of human rights that occur in any Member State;
• The Court adjudges and makes declarations on the legality of Regulations, Directives, Decisions, and other subsidiary legal instruments adopted by ECOWAS.

Competence in matters of arbitration

Pending the establishment of an Arbitration tribunal, provided for under Article 16 of the Revised Treaty, the Court has competence to act as Arbitration.

WHO IS ENTITLED TO HAVE ACCES TO THE COURT ?
Access to the Court is open to the following:

• All Member States and the Commission, for actions brought for failure by Member States to fulfil their obligations;
• Member States, the Council of Ministers and the Commission, for determination of the legality of an action in relation to any Community text.
• Individuals and corporate bodies, for any act of the Community which violates the rights of such individuals or corporate bodies;
• Staff of any of the ECOWAS Institutions;
• Persons who are victims of human rights violation occurring in any Member State;
• National courts or parties to a case, when such national courts or parties request that the ECOWAS Court interprets, on preliminary grounds, the meaning of any legal instrument of the Community;
• The Authority of Heads of State and Government, when bringing cases before the Court on issues other than those cited above.

HOW TO ACCESS THE COURT ?
Cases are filed before the Court through written applications addressed to the registry. Such applications must indicate the name of the applicant, the party against whom the proceedings are being instituted, a brief statement of the facts of the case, and the orders being sought by the plaintiff.

APPLICABLE LAW
The Court applies the Treaty, the Conventions, Protocols and Regulations adopted by the Community and the general principles of law as set out in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.
In the area of human rights protection, the Court equally applies, inter alia, international instruments relating to human rights and ratified by the State or States party to the case.

DECISIONS OF THE COURT

Decisions of the Court are not subject to appeal, except in cases of application for revision by the Court; decisions of the Court may also come under objection from third parties. Decisions of the Court are binding and each Member State shall indicate the competent national authority responsible for the enforcement of decisions of the Court.