What Nnamdi Kanu should do over court declaring IPOB a terrorist group – Adegboruwa

[Nwachineke]

– Human rights lawyer, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa said the order of the Federal High Court proscribing Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) is faulty in law

– Adegboruwa said Abubakar Malami, the attorney-general of the federation, cannot competently sue IPOB as a defendant, in any court of law

– He, however, urged Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of IPOB to contact his lawyer and file a lawsuit against the declaration of IPOB as a terrorist organisation

A Lagos activist lawyer, Ebun-olu Adegboruwa, has called on Nnamdi Kanu the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to challenge the decision of the Federal High Court which proscribed him and the group.

According to a press release obtained by PLUSMILA.com, Adegboruwa also said there cannot be any legal entity in law referred to as IPOB as such entity does not exist in law.

He said: ”The Attorney-General of the Federation cannot competently sue IPOB as a defendant, in any court of law, the same being an entity unknown to law.


”The Court cannot make an order against a non existing entity, such as IPOB. Such order, if and when made, is at large and unenforceable.

”The Supreme Court has stated it times without number that the court cannot proceed against a non juristic person.

”The court, which is a creation of law to interpret the law, cannot competently proscribe what does not exist in the eye of the law. ”If IPOB is registered in Nigeria at all, it can only sue and be sued in the corporate name of its incorporated trustees.

”The Hon Attorney-General, with all due respect, cannot file or maintain a suit in court against IPOB, in the manner formulated in this case.

”I urge Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and all those concerned to proceed to challenge the competence of the suit itself and the jurisdiction of the court to make the order.

”I verily believe that the federal government should follow the noble advice that General Muhammadu Buhari gave to the United Nations, to adopt dialogue in the resolution of the agitations coming from the southeast”