Ekpa, the Southeast and the Nigerian State

Congratulations Hon. Justice Dije Aboki

Before I go into the word for today, it is appropriate that This Day Lawyer congratulates Hon. Justice Dije Aboki, on her elevation to the position of Chief Judge of Kano State; the first female substantive Chief Judge of Kano State, Nigeria. Hearty Congratulations, your Lordship.

In January 2015, during the tenure of Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso, Hon. Justice Patricia Mahmoud was sworn in as the Acting Chief Judge of Kano State. She was however, not confirmed, and having served in an acting capacity for a while, she was elevated to the Court of Appeal (a story for another day).

Section 271(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended in 2023)(the Constitution) provides that the Governor of a State shall appoint the Chief Judge of a State on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC), subject to confirmation of the appointment by the State House of Assembly. I therefore, also congratulate the new Governor of Kano State, Abba Yusuf, and those involved in the appointment of Hon. Justice Dije Aboki, for their progressive move and step in the right direction. It just goes to show how important leadership is, and why placing round pegs in round holes is crucial, for there to be fairness and advancement.

First Assignment for the Security Agencies

The new Service Chiefs, particularly the Inspector General of Police (IGP) and the Chief of Army Staff, already have their work cut out for them. See Section 4 of the Police Act  2020 (PA) and Sections 14(2)(b), 214 & 217(1)(c) of the Constitution. The primary purpose of Government is to secure the lives and property of the people, and this is achieved through the law enforcement/security agencies. In Egheghe v State (2020) LPELR-50552(SC) per Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, JSC, the Apex Court reminded the Nigeria Police Force of “the sacred duty entrusted to them”, “the protection and security of the lives and property of citizens”. Therefore, one of the first assignments of our security agencies, is not just to quell the insurgency in the North East, the attacks by Herders on the Farmers and Villagers in North Central, kidnapping and banditry all over the place, but as a matter of urgency, to stop the nonsensical ‘sit-at-home’ that criminals using violence, have unlawfully imposed on the people of the South East on Mondays or any other day, or this recent week-long one, imposed in the first week of July. Enough is enough.  

Unlawful Sit-at-Home Order

Our right to freedom of movement guaranteed by Section 41(1) of the Constitution, can only be derogated from or restricted by a law enacted in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or health, or for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedoms of other persons (see Section 45(1)(a) & (b) of the Constitution). In short, such right to freedom of movement can only be interfered with in limited circumstances, in compliance with the law. I submit that IPOB or any other secessionist group, has no right whatsoever to restrict the movement of anybody in furtherance of whatever cause they may be clamouring for. Their sit-at-home orders, are unconstitutional and illegal. See the case of Ezeigbo & Anor v Asco Investment Ltd & Anor (2022) LPELR-56864(SC) per Mohammed Lawal Garba, JSC.

Last week, a video circulated on social media, where some masked, armed criminals somewhere in the South East were destroying the wares of petty traders, for daring to set up shop on a day that they had been instructed not to go out by these criminal elements. If the cowards were brave, why did they cover their faces during their frenzied attack on the traders’ wares, calling themselves by numbers and not names, in order to avoid identification? As if Nigerians are not going through enough hardship, finding it difficult to keep body and soul together, and some miscreants are preventing people from eking out a living. They must be stopped. Non-State actors cannot continue to be allowed to run riot with such gusto and aplomb (relish too) – it shows a weakness on the part of the State, and a level of anarchy in the country.

Just like political thugs who fight and kill themselves for politicians, who themselves keep safe and sound in Abuja or wherever they are, and their children equally cocooned safely abroad, I was amused to see one Ekpa character, dressed in his white and gold embroidered housecoat to match his gaudy, gold sofa, looking comfy, cosy and relaxed, possibly in Finland where he is said to reside, in the serenity of his home, stating that he was sitting at home and directing a one week sit-at-home for people who are already living in harsh circumstances in Nigeria, possibly below poverty level unable to make ends meet; who need to earn a daily living just to be able to feed, while those executing his instructions looked wretched and pauperised. How inconsiderate and wicked! Someone like Mr Ekpa should have been arrested in Finland, while Nigeria commences extradition proceedings against him, to come home to face charges of treason, conspiracy to commit treason, terrorism, amongst others.

Right to Self-Determination v Criminality

While it is accepted that the right to self-determination is a basic human right – see Article 1 (1) of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights adopted on December 16, 1966 (ICCPR), I submit that this right doesn’t extend to achieving this purpose by engaging in violence, or other activities that destroy the rights of others. The line between the agitation for self-determination and criminality, has been crossed by the likes of Ekpa, his group and others like them.

A large number of Nigerians of Igbo extraction believe in “One Nigeria”, and Sections 38(1) & 40 of the Constitution guarantee their right to freedom of thought and association, respectively. If they did not believe in the unity of Nigeria, Peter Obi of the Labour Party would not have contested for the Presidency of Nigeria in the recently concluded 2023 election, nor would the whole of the South East have voted for him. From their body language and voting pattern, it is obvious that majority of Igbos wanted a President of Igbo extraction to lead Nigeria. No separatist group can then force them, by means of violence and intimidation, to secede.

The activities of IPOB and other violent separatist groups, oppressing the people to stay at home instead of leaving them to go about their legitimate activities, also violates other rights of the people of the South East, like the right to personal liberty and freedom of movement guaranteed in Sections 35(1) & 41(1) of the Constitution, respectively. Bombing of Government facilities like Police Stations, the unlawful possession of arms and ammunition, and the use of arms in unleashing violence against the people amounts to nothing less than assault, in some cases, murder, terrorism and treason, since it is levying war against the State in order to intimidate the President, Federal or State Government in the quest for Biafra. See Section 37 of the Criminal Code Act which is applicable in the Southern Parts of Nigeria (CC); the punishment for treason and conspiracy to commit same, is death. 

The fact that some of the conspirators like Mr Ekpa may be outside the shores of Nigeria, does not make them less culpable. See Enahoro v Queen (1965) LPELR-25238(SC) per Chukwunweike Idigbe, JSC; Boro & Ors v Republic (1966) LPELR- 25346(SC) per Adetokunbo Adegboyega Ademola JSC (as he then was). Just like Isaac Boro, Mr Ekpa, whether as a leader in the proscribed IPOB or some other splinter group, has a so-called liberation plan to achieve Biafra, recruiting members to fight in furtherance of this cause, and being a part of their unlawful training and drilling; having the determination to use violence for the purpose of the South East seceding to form Biafra, and providing members with uniforms and arms to this end; demanding the allegiance of members by oath taking, and counselling members to unleash violence on the State and the people, to ensure compliance to their sit-at-home calls etc. The only difference between Mr Boro and Mr Ekpa, is that unlike the latter, the former was physically present in Nigeria; their unlawful activities were similar. In Boro & Ors v Republic (Supra) the Apex Court upheld the decision of the trial court convicting the Appellants and sentencing them to death for treason, holding that the Prosecution had proved the requirements of Section 37(1) of the CC beyond reasonable doubt. 

Similarly, we can see that that acts of Mr Ekpa and his group fit the definition of Terrorism under Sections 15 & 46 of the EFCC Act 2004 (amongst other laws), particularly Section 15(3) thereof with regard to Mr Ekpa, as restated in the case of Abdulmumini v FRN (2017) LPELR-43726(SC) per Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun, JSC. 

Conclusion 

Nigerians are tired of living in fear. We need to see some progress, in our security circumstances. However,  the cooperation of community members is also required, to assist the security agencies with reliable information about the activities and whereabouts of these miscreants. The new Service Chiefs have been ushered in with ‘Pomp and Pageantry’; let them show us that they deserve it! The clock has started ticking.