‘IPOB Takes Proscription Fight To Supreme Court’– Challenges Appeal Court’s Terror Label, Claims Rights Violation

The Indigenous People of Biafra has asked the Supreme Court to overturn the judgment of the Court of Appeal which upheld its proscription and designated it as a terrorist organisation.

The Court of Appeal had upheld the decision of late Justice Abdu-Kafarati, a former Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, which proscribed IPOB and declared it a terrorist organisation on January 18, 2018.

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.

Dissatisfied, IPOB challenged the High Court’s decision at the appeal court.

However, a three-member panel of the appellate court 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.

Unrelenting, IPOB expressed dissatisfaction with the appellate court’s decision and filed a five-ground notice of appeal at the Supreme Court on 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.

He 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.

Ejimakor 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, he asserted IPOB’s right to self-determination, stating that oppressed or colonized people have the right to free themselves.

In the relief, IPOB prayed the Supreme Court to allow the appeal and reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal.