Biafra: Judiciary to the Rescue: Upholding Justice and Protecting Human Rights in Nigeria

 Biafra: Judiciary to the Rescue: Upholding Justice and Protecting Human Rights in Nigeria 

■ Writer: Ezekwereogu Odinaka

■ Twitter:@umuchiukwu

■ 04.02.2025

Nigeria’s judiciary is at a critical juncture, faced with the daunting task of upholding justice and protecting human rights. The recent abduction of Igbo people by Nigerian security agents, as reported by Amnesty International, serves as a stark reminder of the judiciary’s vital role in safeguarding citizens’ rights. 

The judiciary’s ability to uphold justice and protect human rights is essential for maintaining social order and promoting democratic values. However, the Nigerian judiciary has faced numerous challenges, including corruption, incompetence, and executive interference, which have undermined its independence and integrity. 

The case of the Igbo people’s abduction is particularly disturbing. Amnesty International has reported that Nigerian security agents have been responsible for the enforced disappearance of hundreds of people in the southeastern region, with many of these cases remaining unresolved. The judiciary must take decisive action to address these human rights abuses and ensure that those responsible are held accountable. 

Also Read.Biafra: Controversy Surrounds Appeal Court Judgment on IPOB's Proscription

To regain public trust and confidence, the judiciary must assert its independence, tackle corruption, and prioritize citizens’ rights. This includes ensuring that all citizens have access to legal representation, regardless of their economic or social status. The judiciary must also take steps to address the systemic challenges facing the institution, including inadequate funding, poor infrastructure, and limited resources. 

The National Judicial Council (NJC) has taken steps to promote judicial independence, discipline, and accountability. However, more needs to be done to address the systemic challenges facing the judiciary. Increased funding and resource allocation are essential to support the operations and modernization of the judiciary. 

In Conclusion, The Nigerian judiciary has a critical role to play in upholding justice and protecting human rights. The recent abduction of Igbo people by Nigerian security agents is a stark reminder of the judiciary’s vital role in safeguarding citizens’ rights. The judiciary must take decisive action to address these human rights abuses and ensure that those responsible are held accountable. 

Recommendations for Judicial Reform 

•Assert Independence: The judiciary must assert its independence and impartiality, free from executive interference and political pressure. 

•Tackle Corruption: The judiciary must take decisive steps to address corruption within its ranks, ensuring transparent and accountable processes. 

•Prioritize Citizens’ Rights: The judiciary must prioritize protecting citizens’ rights, providing access to justice, and ensuring fair treatment for all. 

•Improve Infrastructure: Adequate funding should be allocated to improve court infrastructure, technology, and facilities.

•Enhance Transparency: Measures like public access to court records, live streaming of proceedings, and performance evaluation should be implemented to enhance transparency and accountability in the judiciary. 

By implementing these recommendations, the Nigerian judiciary can take a significant step towards regaining public trust and confidence, upholding justice, and protecting human rights. 

Edited by Mazi Ikechukwu Chibundu 

Editor in Chief Udeagha Obasi 

For Umuchiukwu Writers

Biafra: Controversy Surrounds Appeal Court Judgment on IPOB's Proscription

 Biafra: Controversy Surrounds Appeal Court Judgment on IPOB's Proscription 

■ Writer: Ezekwereogu Odinaka

■ Twitter:@umuchiukwu

■ 04.02.2025

Allegations of Bias and Corruption Raise Questions About Justice The recent judgment by the Nigerian Appeal Court, upholding the proscription of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) as a terrorist group, has sparked widespread controversy and outrage. 

The decision, handed down by Justices Hamma Akawu Barka, O.E. Abang, and O.O. Oyewumi on January 30, 2025, has been met with fierce criticism from human rights groups, lawyers, and members of the public, who question the impartiality and fairness of the ruling. Allegations of Bias and Corruption Justices O.E. Abang and O.O. Oyewumi have previously faced serious allegations of bias and corruption. 

Abang has been accused of delivering judgments that consistently favour the government, while Oyewumi has been criticized for handling high-profile cases. On July 12, 2017, Justice Abang was accused of bias in a high-profile case involving former Governor Nyesom Wike. His decision was widely criticized, with many arguing that it was influenced by external factors. Similarly, Justice Oyewumi has faced criticism for handling cases involving human rights activists and opposition figures. 

Also Read:Justice Under Siege: Why Nigeria's Judicial System Must Stand Against IPOB's Proscription

On February 22, 2019, he was accused of disregarding the constitutional rights of the accused and delivering a judgment widely seen as unfair in the case of prominent human rights activist Omoyele Sowore. Implications of the Judgment The ruling upholding IPOB’s proscription as a terrorist group has far-reaching consequences for the people of the Southeast region and IPOB members. The proscription has been used to justify human rights abuses, including arbitrary arrests, detention, and extrajudicial killings. Many argue that the judgment is a clear attempt by the government to silence opposition voices and suppress dissent. 

The proscription of IPOB has been widely condemned by human rights groups, who argue that it violates the organization’s fundamental rights to freedom of association and expression. Conclusion The Appeal Court’s decision to uphold IPOB’s proscription as a terrorist group raises serious concerns about the integrity of the judiciary and the government’s commitment to human rights. 

The allegations of bias and corruption against the judges, combined with the far-reaching implications of the judgment, have created a sense of unease and distrust among the public. As Nigeria continues to grapple with issues of justice and accountability, the judiciary must remain impartial and fair in its decisions. 

The Nigerian people deserve a judiciary that is independent, unbiased, and committed to upholding the rule of law while protecting human rights. 

Edited by Mazi Ikechukwu Chibundu 

Editor in Chief Udeagha Obasi 

Published By Umuchiukwu Writers

Justice Under Siege: Why Nigeria's Judicial System Must Stand Against IPOB's Proscription

 

Justice Under Siege: Why Nigeria's Judicial System Must Stand Against IPOB's Proscription 

■ Writer: Ezekwereogu Odinaka

■ Twitter:@umuchiukwu

■ 03.02.2025

The Nigerian judicial system is at a critical juncture, faced with the daunting task of upholding justice and protecting human rights. 

The proscription of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) as a terrorist organization is a contentious issue that has sparked heated debates and raised concerns about the erosion of fundamental freedoms. The Illegality Of Proscription The Enugu State High Court has already ruled that the proscription of IPOB by the South-East Governors' Forum in 2017 was illegal, unconstitutional, and null and void. This landmark judgment underscores the importance of upholding the rule of law and protecting the rights of citizens. 

The judicial system must ensure that any actions taken by the government or other authorities are in line with the Constitution and do not infringe on individual liberties. The Right To Self-Determination IPOB's leader, Nnamdi Kanu, has argued that the organization is advocating for the right to self-determination, which is a fundamental human right. The judicial system must recognise and protect this right, rather than labelling it as a terrorist activity. By doing so, the judiciary can promote peaceful resolution of conflicts and prevent the escalation of violence. 

The Dangers Of Labeling Labeling IPOB as a terrorist organization can have far-reaching consequences, including the erosion of trust in the government and the judicial system. It can also lead to the marginalization of certain groups and the perpetuation of violence. The judicial system must exercise caution and ensure that any labelling or proscription is based on credible evidence and is in line with international human rights standards. 

International Implications. The proscription of IPOB has also raised concerns internationally, with many organizations and countries expressing concerns about the erosion of human rights in Nigeria. The judicial system must take into account these international implications and ensure that its decisions are in line with international human rights law. The Way Forward. 

The Nigerian judicial system has a critical role to play in promoting justice, protecting human rights, and upholding the rule of law. In the case of IPOB, the judiciary must: 1. Uphold the rule of law: Ensure that any actions taken by the government or other authorities are in line with the constitution and do not infringe on individual liberties. 2. Protect human rights: Recognize and protect the right to self-determination and other fundamental human rights. 

3. Promote peaceful resolution: Encourage peaceful resolution of conflicts and prevent the escalation of violence. 4. Ensure transparency and accountability: Ensure that all decisions and actions are transparent and accountable to the public. By taking these steps, the Nigerian judicial system can demonstrate its commitment to justice, human rights, and the rule of law. 

Edited By Aguocha Chinwendum 

Published By Umuchiukwu Writers