Bar Ejimakor Writes Human Rights Commission Of Needs To Probe Nnamdi Kanu’s Rights Violations

30th , March 2022

The special counsel to the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Barrister Aloy Ejimakor , has petitioned the National Human Rights Commission to investigate, probe and act upon the human rights violations of his client, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, by agents of the federal government.

Recall that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, the Indigenous People of Biafra was extraordinary renditioned back to Nigeria from Kenya since June last year, and has recalled the ill-treatments he went through during and after his arrest in Kenya and his rendition in Nigeria.

Addressing the executive secretary of the commission, Anthony O. Ojukwu, SAN, through a petition made available to Umuchiukwu Writers, Ejimakor drew the attention of the National Human Rights Commission on the refusal of the agents of the federal government to allow Mazi Kanu to have access to an independent physician of his choice to examine his health status while in detention, dissecting the nature of such human right violation giving reference of the section 8 of the torture act.

He said, “Since his confinement, our Client has repeatedly requested independent medical examination by a physician of his own choice but the requests were denied. Section 7 of the Torture Act provides that ‘a person arrested, detained or under custodial investigation shall have the right to be informed of his right to demand a physical and psychological examination by an independent and competent doctor of his own choice after interrogation, which shall be conducted outside the influence of the police or security forces”.

On how Mazi Kanu was arrested, tortured and extradited to Nigeria from Kenya in violation of his human rights, having entered Kenya as a British citizen, Ejimakor stated, that Kanu was abducted at the at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport Nairobi in Kenya on June 19, 2021, was taken to a private place by his abductors, chained to the floor for 8 days before his rendition to Nigeria adding that Kanu was meant to sleep on the floor nights before his arraignment in the court where he faced a 4 count charges without the knowledge of his counsels.

“Our Client states that, from 29th June 2021 to date, he has been subjected to solitary confinement, lasting for 23 hours each day at the Headquarters of the State Security Services in Abuja”.

“On June 29 2021, our Client was arraigned without Counsel on the 4-count Charges standing against him as of that date. Subsequently, the Charges were amended to 15-counts, including 14-counts that bordered on Terrorism and are thus totally unrelated to any of the former 4-counts for which the Nigerian government claims that our Client was ‘intercepted and extradited’. This is a clear contravention of our Client’s rights under

Section 15 of Nigeria’s Extradition Act which provides as follows:

“Where, in accordance with the law of any county within the Commonwealth or in pursuance of an extradition agreement between Nigeria and another country (whether within the Commonwealth or not), any person accused of or unlawfully at large after conviction of an offence committed within the jurisdiction of Nigeria is surrendered to Nigeria by the county in question, then, so long as he has not had a reasonable opportunity of returning to that country, that person shall not be detained (whether under this Act or otherwise), tried or otherwise dealt with in Nigeria for or in respect of an offence committed by him before his surrender to Nigeria other than- (a) the offense for which he was surrendered or any lesser offence which may be proved by the facts on which his surrender was granted; or (b) any other offence (being one corresponding to an offence described in section 20 of this Act) of the same nature as the offence for which he was surrendered: ‘Provided that a person falling within this section shall not be detained or tried for an offence by virtue of paragraph (b) of this section without the prior consent of the country surrendering him’ “.

He further prayed the commission to take prompt measures to initiate investigation of his Complaint.

He said,” For your ease of reference, Section 5 of the National Human Rights Commission Act provides, in pertinent part, that: ‘The Commission shall deal with all matters relating to the protection of human rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and other International Treaties on human rights to which Nigeria is a signatory”.

That, the commission “monitor and investigate all cases of human rights violation in Nigeria and make appropriate recommendation to the President for the prosecution and such other actions as it may deem expedient in each circumstance”.

The commission” should assist victims of human rights violation and seek appropriate redress and remedies on their behalf”.

That the commission ‘recommend to the federal government that it is a violation of the law and therefore of the rights of our client for him to be subjected to any more charges beyond the four-count charges facing our cient as of the date of his said “interception and extradition”.’

Others are, That the commission “recommend to the federal government, the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the attorney-general of the federation to take prompt steps to implement the Provisional Measures requested by the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights; and that the failure to implement said provisional measures is a violation of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, which Nigeria ratified and even domesticated.

That the commission “recommend to the federal government to take prompt measures to initiate the prosecution of all persons who were complicit in the torture of our client, in line with the provisions of the Anti-Torture Act 2017 and other pertinent laws.”