By Abdulrahman Aliagan,
In a legal battle spanning over seven years, the proscription of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) as a terrorist organization has once again been upheld. On Thursday, the Court of Appeal in Abuja reaffirmed the Federal High Court’s 2017 ruling that outlawed the group, sealing yet another chapter in IPOB’s prolonged legal struggle against the Nigerian government.
The three-member appellate panel, led by Justice Hamma Barka, ruled unanimously, maintaining that the government had acted lawfully in proscribing IPOB due to its activities, which were deemed a threat to national security and stability. This decision effectively nullifies a contrary judgment issued by a State High Court in Enugu in 2023, which had declared the proscription unconstitutional.
IPOB, founded by Nnamdi Kanu, has been at the forefront of the agitation for an independent state of Biafra, seeking a political breakaway from Nigeria’s South-East and parts of the South-South regions. Since its inception, the group has been a subject of intense scrutiny and political debate, with the Nigerian government labeling its activities as insurgent and destabilizing.
In September 2017, then-President Muhammadu Buhari issued a presidential proclamation formally proscribing the group. Shortly after, the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by the then Acting Chief Judge, Justice Abdul Kafarati, granted a legal order affirming IPOB’s designation as a terrorist organization. This action was initiated through an application by the Attorney-General of the Federation at the time, Abubakar Malami (SAN).
Further bolstering the government’s stance, the South-East Governors’ Forum also announced the group’s proscription within the region, reinforcing the state’s position against IPOB’s secessionist ambitions.
Despite these legal setbacks, IPOB and its leader, Nnamdi Kanu, have continuously challenged the proscription through the courts. Their persistence seemingly bore fruit in October 2023, when Justice A.O. Onovo of the Enugu State High Court ruled that IPOB’s proscription was unconstitutional.
In his judgment, Justice Onovo held that the reliance on the Terrorism Prevention Act and the administrative actions of the South-East Governors’ Forum to ban IPOB violated Section 42 of the Nigerian Constitution, which prohibits discrimination based on ethnicity. The court further ruled that the proscription infringed on Kanu’s fundamental rights, citing the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights.
This decision momentarily shifted the legal tide in IPOB’s favor, offering a glimpse of hope to the group’s supporters. However, that hope was short-lived.
Thursday’s ruling by the Court of Appeal effectively quashes the Enugu High Court’s decision. The three-judge panel found no reason to overturn the 2017 proscription order, dismissing IPOB’s appeal for lack of merit.
For the Nigerian government, this judgment reaffirms its stance on IPOB as a security threat. For IPOB and its supporters, however, the ruling is another hurdle in their fight for recognition and legitimacy.
With the legal door still open, all eyes now turn to the Supreme Court. Will IPOB and Nnamdi Kanu take the battle to Nigeria’s highest court? If they do, the legal and political discourse surrounding IPOB’s status is far from over.
For now, the Court of Appeal’s verdict stands: IPOB remains a proscribed organization in Nigeria.
