Nigeria’s Court reinstates terrorism charges against separatist leader
Legal Events
Nigeria’s Supreme Court on Friday overturned a lower court ruling dismissing terrorism charges against a popular separatist leader whose trial has been blamed for an outbreak of violence in the country’s southeast region.
The Court said Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) separatist group that seeks independence for Nigeria’s southeastern region, still faces terrorism charges despite the lower court ruling. Kanu, who also holds British citizenship, has already pleaded not guilty to the charges.
In announcing the decision, Justice Garba Mohammed said that although Nigeria’s secret police violated Kanu’s rights during his arrest and extradition from Kenya in 2021, the Court of Appeal was wrong to rule in October last year that the violation was grounds for the dismissal of the charges.
“No legislation in the country stripped the trial court of the jurisdiction to go ahead with Kanu’s case, despite the illegal action,” of the secret police, the justice said. The trial of the separatist leader, who also holds British citizenship, is expected to resume next year.
Kanu has remained in detention since the Court of Appeal’s ruling.
The Supreme Court decisoin further complicates the fate of Kanu who has been in and out of jail since 2015 when he was first arrested and charged with terrorism and treason. He has denied any wrongdoing and his supporters have accused the government of unjustly targeting him to clamp down on the group’s separatist campaign.
The IPOB campaign for an independent state of Biafra follows the short-lived Republic of Biafra which fought and lost a civil war from 1967 to 1970 to gain independence from Nigeria. An estimated 1 million people died in the war, many from the southeastern region.
However, the Nigerian government has said the country’s unity is “not negotiable” and has often accused Kanu’s group of instigating violence in the southeast, often by imposing lockdowns and targeting prominent people in the region. Dozens have been killed this year in the violence blamed on IPOB, which the group denies.
Related listings
-
Russian authorities ask the Court to declare the LGBTQ ‘movement’ extremist
Legal Events 11/16/2023The Russian Justice Ministry on Friday said it has filed a lawsuit with the nation’s Supreme Court to outlaw the LGBTQ+ “international public movement” as extremist, the latest crippling blow against the already beleaguered LGBTQ+ c...
-
Sydney court postpones extradition hearing of former US military pilot
Legal Events 10/24/2023A Sydney court on Monday postponed an extradition hearing for a former U.S. military pilot accused of illegally training Chinese aviators until May as his lawyers attempt to further build their case.Boston-born Dan Duggan, 55, was scheduled to fight ...
-
Dutch court convicts man who projected antisemitic message on museum
Legal Events 10/15/2023A court in Amsterdam sentenced a Polish-Canadian national to two months in prison on Thursday for projecting a message alluding to an antisemitic conspiracy theory onto the Anne Frank House museum.Robert Wilson was charged with insulting a group and ...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.