admin
The Indigenous People of Biafra has filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which upheld its proscription and designation as a terrorist organisation.
It will be recalled that the Court of Appeal, in a judgment, upheld the decision of the Federal High Court proscribing IPOB and declaring it a terrorist organisation.
On January 18, 2018, the late Justice Abdu-Kafarati, a former Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, issued a ruling proscribing IPOB.
Justice Abdu-Kafarati declared all IPOB activities illegal, particularly in the South-East and South-South regions of Nigeria, stating that the group constituted a threat to national security.
He directed the Attorney General of the Federation to publish the proscription order in two national newspapers and an online platform.
Dissatisfied, IPOB challenged the High Court’s decision at the appellate court. However, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal unanimously ruled on January 30, 2025, that the Federal Government acted lawfully in proscribing IPOB.
The appellate court, in its lead judgment delivered by Justice Hamma Barka, held that IPOB’s activities posed a threat to Nigeria’s continued existence and the security of its citizens.
The appellate court dismissed IPOB’s appeal, describing it as unmeritorious.
Unrelenting, IPOB expressed dissatisfaction with the appellate court’s decision and filed a five-ground notice of appeal at the Supreme Court dated February 7, 2025.
The suit marked SC/CA/A/214/2018, lists the Attorney General of the Federation as the sole respondent and IPOB as the sole appellant.
In the appeal, IPOB argued that the lower court erred in law by declaring the group a threat to national security.
It also contended that the Court of Appeal erred in holding that national security concerns outweighed IPOB’s right to a fair hearing as provided under Sections 36(2) and 45(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
IPOB, through its counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, argued that the process by which it was proscribed and declared a terrorist organisation violated the provisions of the Constitution.
Ejimakor emphasised that under the Constitution, a period of emergency must be declared by the President pursuant to Section 305 for any restrictions on rights to apply.
The group further argued that the appellate court lacked the jurisdiction to declare a threat to national security or emergency as the basis for denying IPOB its constitutional right to a fair hearing.
IPOB contended that the Court of Appeal’s decision breached non-derogable provisions of the Constitution, particularly those prohibiting the imposition of disabilities or restrictions on individuals based on their ethnic group, place of origin, or political opinion.
Citing Article 20 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, IPOB asserted its right to self-determination, stating that oppressed or colonised people have the right to free themselves.
“Colonised or oppressed people shall have the right to free themselves from the bonds of domination by resorting to any means recognised by the international community.”
IPOB also emphasised that the African Charter, which guarantees this right, is recognised as binding in Nigeria and other member states of the African Union.
In its relief, IPOB prayed the Supreme Court to allow the appeal and reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal
