₦airaland Forum

Malali I already know your intention as you keep peddling half truths and lies against Kanu and IPOB all over this platform. You have not once called out the government for it's role over the violence and killings in the south east. Your hate won't stop the release of Nnamdi Kanu.

malali:

When Nnamdi Kanu was saying the president was dead and had been replaced by a cloned Jubril El-Sudani from Niger republic.....did he produce a single witness to corroborate this or testify to the allegation ?

LMAO

Now, all of a sudden you know that a witness is needed to make outlandish claims ??

Can you explain how I've no point? Seem you are part of the Obidient movement. Peter Obi can not be trusted.

DMerciful:
You have no point!

Nnamdi Kanu was charged for terrorism and not about what he said regarding Buhari. Nigeria's government has failed to produce a single witness to testify how Kanu was directly linked to any killings or violence in the south east.

malali:
Only condition the government will release Nnamdi kanu is if he produces Jubril el-sudani.

He thought he was a clown ? Its now our turn to clown him as well.

And the Jubril el-Sudani he produces must have the tattoo on his left leg as he has always described.

A joint detachment of defence and security operatives has forcefully dispersed the Omoyele Sowore-led #FreeNnamdiKanuNow protesters in the Maitama Area of Abuja.

The protesters, which included Sowore, Barr. Aloy Ejimakor and others had gathered around the Nigeria Communications Commission NCC headquarters in Maitama, chanting “Free Nnamdi Kanu Now”.

They were also heard cautioning the police against teargassing them just before sounds of gunshots were heard, and they scampered to safety.

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2025/10/breaking-security-operatives-fire-at-freennamdikanunow-protesters-in-abuja/

My answer to your question is irrelevant because I don't have an ambition to be the president of Nigeria. When you decide to become a public figure or occupy a public office like governor or vying to become a president of a country then you should be able to develop the thick skin required for the office. People will call you unprintable names and say all kinds of things about you. Peter Obi can not use that as an excuse not to support the movement to release Nnamdi Kanu if he truly believes in what he preaches regarding justice, competent principled leadership and accountability.

malali:

Kanu smeared countless people, shot off wild accusations without regard for consequences, and now he’s the one behind bars while some of those he slandered are forced to beg for his release. Imagine being branded “LGBT” falsely in public and then being expected to champion the freedom of the man who ruined your reputation. If someone had lied about you like that, would you lead a protest for them?

Peaceful protest is not illegal. Nigeria government's violent campaign against IPOB brought about tragic consequencies, destruction of lives and properties. You keep parroting the same false narrative on every thread about Nnamdi Kanu.

malali:
Peter Obi wants to stay squarely within the law.

Nnamdi Kanu’s campaign brought tragic consequences, lives lost, homes destroyed, livelihoods ruined by coerced sit-ins and unrest. Any reasonable person should avoid association with that brand of disruption.
Kanu’s actions warrant severe punishment; a long custodial sentence (40–50 years) would serve as a deterrent to others who gain satisfaction from violence, theft of property, and the destruction of people’s livelihoods.

I understand that Kanu had in the past spoken negatively about Peter Obi sleeping with other men. If this is another reason behind his silence over the injustice towards Nnamdi Kanu, then it shows that he is too petty to be Nigeria's president. It shows that his strong principled stance against injustice is a farce.

Earlier this year, Ibom Air passenger Comfort Emmanson was dragged almost naked off a plane after assaulting airline personnel. Peter Obi in his usual antics of reacting in a bombastic way to every national issue, released a press statement in which he said.

“We must end this selective treatment of the poor or less privileged. If justice must be served, it should be served to all, and it must be served fairly."

“The rule of law based on justice for all must remain the guidepost of our democracy.”

Ever since #FreeNnamdiKanu movement started, Peter Obi strangely has gone silent, he appear to have suddenly lost his voice, his usually way of dominating the news cycle seem non existent, unlike the case of Ibom Air passenger Comfort Emmanson, Peter Obi appears to have lost his strong stance on justice in calling for an end to the unjust treatment of Nnamdi Kanu. I had wondered as it was not clear to me initially as to why Peter Obi who usually loves to grace the front pages of newspapers on every national trending issue will choose to be silent and stay away from supporting the release of Nnamdi Kanu until Sowore made a revelation about it. While responding to a question asked by Seun Okinbaloye whether he reached out to Peter Obi, Sowore said, "Well, Peter Obi interestingly never got back to me. I found out two days ago that he had responded somehow, and I think it was a measured response.

“He said, ‘Okay, you know, they shouldn't have arrested him.’ I think Peter Obi and his people feel like this is some kind of ‘steal the show,’ we don't want to be part of it kind of thing. But anybody who is sensible would understand that where there's injustice, you don't look at who is fighting for what is a just cause. You think about the cause.”

I watched a video of his response regarding Nnamdi Kanu and all what Obi could say about it in summary was a lame response that Nnamdi Kanu should not have been arrested in the first place. Peter Obi has always portrayed himself as the face of the oppressed in Nigeria, he has on several occasions portrayed himself as someone who believes strongly in justice. It is indeed a shame that he chose to politicize joining a peaceful protest to demand for the release of Nnamdi Kanu by staying away simply because he is not the one that started the movement or leading it. Just as Sowore said and I agree that "where there's injustice, you don't look at who is fighting for what is a just cause. You think about the cause". The fact that Peter Obi, an Igbo man can not rally his base to join the October 20th peaceful protest in soildarity to demand for an end to the continued injustice towards Nnamdi Kanu, shows that Peter Obi cannot be trusted. It is a confirmation of his true selfish motives that he cares more about politics than justice even when it has to do with his tribesman.

Peter Obi failed Nnamdi Kanu when it mattered most....

Do you think they don't know that it is fake news? They simply don't care because of their hate for Nnamdi Kanu and i-gbo people. They are agents of hate and mischief.

Brendaniel:
This report has been debunked many times, you guys should stop posting false information..

Are you aware of chapter 4. section 40 of 1999 constitution which states that....

Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interests....

sreamsense:
And how Nnamdi KANU wanted to fix rotten Nigeria is to kill Igbos for igbos, right? Use innocent Igbo virgin girls for for juju. Labelled Igbo elites as saboteurs and kill them. Only him and those drinking his urine are innocent and can lead Igbo right.

Just keep fooling yourself around, if they born you well. Go out for the protest physically and demonstrate in Aso rock where court order forbidden you not to reach, I will not even pity you for once or waste my time carrying any placard to free you

It is glaring that APC is an evil political party.

The only reason why people may not turn out for the protest is because of the disgraceful injunction by Abuja high court against the protest. The police have been empowered indirectly though this unjust court ruling to shoot and intimidate peaceful protesters.

youngEmelex:
Sowere has never achieved anything from organizing a protest and will not this time. I am predicting this event not as if am against their movement. The protest to release Nnamdi Kanu has failed already just like every past protest under APC failed. There will be extremely low turnout of protesters and the protest will go unnoticed. Even if people eventually turn up for the protest, there will be use of brutal force against them. If I were in the shoes of IPOB leadership, another person should be elected as the overall head because Nnamdi Kanu is gone forever.

There are subsisting court orders acquitting/freeing Nnamdi Kanu but the government disobeyed court order to release him. Also, no single witness has been presented by Nigeria's government to testify linking Kanu directly to any killings in the south east.

Christistruth03:
It cannot be thrown out of Court because Ipobs numerous victims meed Justice for the Kpaings on Kanu's orders

How is it a gossip, what did he say that is a lie?

MaziObinnaokija:
USELESS gossip 😑😒😕🙄😔😒 .

Tell SOWORE...... MAZI ONYENDU is not going anywhere till court do the needful about his Terrorism

If Nigeria was not lawless then Kanu's case would've been thrown out by the court.

Christistruth03:
It is Kanu that is Lawless.

If Nigeria was Lawless Kanu would not be in court

They understand it but choose to pretend not to. They are only after Kanu's head simply because he is an igbo man. Nigeria's constitution and it's justice system has been bastardized and shown to be useless by the government over the continued shameful detention of Nnamdi Kanu. You can imagine that even in the said terrorism trial after kidnapping him from Kenya, the government could not provide a single witness to testify that Kanu's broadcast made him or her kill and destroy properties. The case is hinged on what he said about Mr. A on day B, what he said about Mr. C on day D, with no evidence linking him to any terrorist act.

gidgiddy:
I dont think you guys understand that the reason why peaceful protest turns violent is when the Nigerian security forces open fire on unarmed protesters. It happened with IPOB, MASSOB, IMN and ENDSARS

Section 39 subsection 1 states....

"Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference"

Take note of this "to receive and impart ideas and information without interference" you can not twist the law when it does not favour you. The court has no power to restrict/limit peaceful protests as doing so means interfering on right of the people to freedom of expression. Malali, you always deceitfully omit facts in your posts about Kanu. You always push half truths and absolve the government of any blame that's why I find your words empty. Kanu's agitation was never violent until the government attacked IPOB members through it's military offensive campaigns in the south east.

You said "The Abuja court didn’t “ban” protests; it limited them around high-risk zones like Aso Rock and the National Assembly, a standard global security practice, not tyranny." Nigerians have the right to protest peacefully in public places such as Unity Fountain, Aso Rock and National Assembly, the court should've mandated the police to provide security for the protesters and not to infringe on protesters rights by restricting them. I know that you will not say all you are saying if the protest was to demand for Kanu to be sentenced to death because you are not different from other malicious hateful people here whose only mission is to ensure that Nnamdi Kanu never gets justice but your plan will fail.

malali:
Freedom of expression isn’t freedom from accountability. Section 39 of the Constitution guarantees peaceful protest, not the right to paralyze the capital or threaten national assets. The Abuja court didn’t “ban” protests; it limited them around high-risk zones like Aso Rock and the National Assembly, a standard global security practice, not tyranny.

Kanu’s earlier movement proved how quickly “peaceful agitation” can morph into chaos, lives lost, businesses ruined, fear normalized. No responsible government sits idle while that repeats. The remedy for a disputed order is appeal, not outrage. Nigeria isn’t lawless; it’s finally insisting that rights and responsibility walk hand-in-hand.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AShnIWj8FA0

Sowore talks about Nnamdi Kanu, Obasanjo, Tinubu, Onanuga, June 12, Nigeria's civil war and more.

There is many injustices in Nigeria, someone has to fight all these injustices - Omoyele Sowore

Hmmm.... What a comment from a citizen of Nigeria.... you rejoice over denial of your right to protest freely. It is obvious you are part of the problem.

sreamsense:
And how Nnamdi KANU wanted to fix rotten Nigeria is to kill Igbos for igbos, right? Use innocent Igbo virgin girls for for juju. Labelled Igbo elites as saboteurs and kill them. Only him and those drinking his urine are innocent and can lead Igbo right.

Just keep fooling yourself around, if they born you well. Go out for the protest physically and demonstrate in Aso rock where court order forbidden you not to reach, I will not even pity you for once or waste my time carrying any placard to free you

I've been in a sober reflective mood, ever since the news broke earlier today on how a federal high court in Abuja disgracefully entertained and approved an injunction filed by Tinubu's government to stop the #FreeNnamdiKanu peaceful protest scheduled for 20th October.

I am forced to question if Nigeria is still a country. Does the constitution still apply to Nigeria? How can a sitting judge after initially declining to grant an ex parte motion filled by the goverment to stop the planned peaceful protest in open court, the same judge still reportedly granted it in chambers, imposing a ban on any protests at Aso Rock Villa, the National Assembly, and the Unity Fountain, venues for the #FreeNnamdiKanu protest in Abuja.

If Nigeria was a real country then the fundamental rights of it's citizen to express themselves peacefully, come together and protest for their rights and wellbeing should not even be a matter that can be challenged in any functional Nigerian court. Section 39 subsection 1 of the 1999 national constitution states and I quote below.

Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.

Also, Nigeria's government still claims to be bound by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, see link below for details

https://placng.org/lawsofnigeria/print.php?sn=24

If all that I stated above is true then how can the same government bound by an obligation to uphold people's rights be seeking a court injunction to stop the people from exercising their rights to peaceful protest? Is it not glaring evidence that Nigeria's government has no regard for the law, human rights or constitution? It is bad enough that Nnamdi Kanu was shameful kidnapped from Kenya to Nigeria by the government but this ridiculous ruling by Abuja federal high court banning peaceful protests demanding for his release has once again exposed Nigeria's injustice system, it is a confirmation that Nigeria is indeed a lawless country. I am appalled!

How can a court make a U turn to ban the protest after initially declining the suit in open court. This is another evidence of judicial injustice.

sreamsense:
Sowore, you better go and challenge it first and be sure you convince the court otherwise to allow you protest in those areas before you do so. If you legally falls into the hand of police that has been looking for legal ways to give you beating of your life, you will sure forget to spell your name if you fall into their hands. Go and ask Igboho.

You better don't allow IPOB/ESN that move with emotion pushes you into the hand of police vengeance. You have already put petrol on your body all these while you are.insulting police, you only need lighter that is in the hands of police to set you ablaze legally. Use your brain well, I will not waste my time protesting for you or anybody that fails to use his brain well in the this protest. Be warned!

Human rights activist and convener of the #RevolutionNow movement, Omoyele Sowore, has vowed to challenge the court order restraining the #FreeNnamdiKanu protests in Abuja, insisting that the planned October 20 demonstration will go on as scheduled.

PUNCH Online earlier reported that a Federal High Court in Abuja had restrained protesters and other groups from staging demonstrations in certain parts of the city.

The court, presided over by Justice M.G. Umar, issued the order on October 17, 2025, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2202/2025 — Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Omoyele Sowore & 4 others.

The ruling bars the respondents and any individuals or groups acting on their behalf from protesting within and around Aso Rock Villa, the National Assembly Complex, Force Headquarters, the Court of Appeal, Eagle Square, and Shehu Shagari Way.

Reacting to the development in a post on his verified X handle on Saturday, Sowore said he was pleased that the Nigeria Police Force appeared to have shown “some respect for the constitutional right to freedom of assembly and protest.”

He questioned why the police had not sought a similar court order against those who, according to him, had been protesting for three consecutive days against the release of the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu.

“Suppose a court order truly exists restricting protests around Aso Rock Villa; it begs the question: why hasn’t the same police force obtained a similar order against those protesting freely for three consecutive days opposing Nnamdi Kanu’s release?” Sowore asked.

“The hypocrisy is glaring. The double standards are undeniable,” he added.

The activist disclosed that his legal team, made up of 115 lawyers, would challenge the alleged court order once they are formally served on Monday.

He, however, maintained that the planned October 20 #FreeNnamdiKanuNow protest would proceed as a peaceful and lawful march.

“October 20 #FreeNnamdiKanuNow remains sacrosanct. We march peacefully, lawfully, and powerfully,” Sowore declared.

https://punchng.com/sowore-vows-to-challenge-court-order-restricting-freennamdikanu-protests/

I guess you did not read the article to the end where it stated a leak forced delay to removd the INEC chairman as the initial plan was to remove him before the end of his tenor.

Koralords:
Did the Inec chairman resign? Sahara and fake news

Did you not read the quote below.

Following this meeting, Tinubu reportedly directed Yakubu to stop performing any official INEC duties and to proceed on terminal leave. However, a leak published by SaharaReporters reportedly forced a brief delay in the announcement of his removal.

Sahara reporters stated that a leak delayed his removal.

seunmsg:
Outright fabrications from Saharareporters as usual. That’s how the blog lied to Nigerians that Wale Edun was down with stroke only for the minister to appear in public walking and standing very well. They even lied in this publication that Prof. Yakubu resigned when every one knows that Yakubu’s tenure ended this October.

No sensible court will entertain such suit. Instead of this shameful attempt to subvert the constitution, let the police do the right and protect peaceful protesters.

Another deceitful analysis so Nnamdi Kanu jumped bail and not the government that wanted to kill him forced him to jump bail? Was he not attacked by Nigerian military in his house? I am now convinced that this discussion is pointless because you are no different from buckeyemedia and others on this thread. IPOB did not start as a lawless armed group and ESN was never formed to carry arms to fight the government. You speak as if self defence is not recognized by law. If in your long worded big grammar, one can't find these basic truths then it is all empty words and waste of effort on your part. You downplayed the killing of over 100 people just to condemn Kanu. Are you even aware that it was the government that pushed IPOB into violence with it's military offensive campaign? This may be my last reply to you on this thread as you've proven to me once again in your analysis that you lack integrity.

malali:
If the government truly had no case, why did he jump bail and flee? Compare that to Sowore, a thorn in the government’s side, who never runs from the law and is in court regularly, fully aware of the limits of his activism. No government can allow a citizen to be 100% lawless, and that’s a truth some refuse to accept.

Incitement isn’t harmless, words can be powerful weapons. Leaders have been jailed without firing a single shot for provoking violence:
• IRA leaders in Ireland
• Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin
• Rwandan genocide propagandists
• Slobodan Milošević

The law holds organizers accountable for creating conditions that lead to violence. Nnamdi Kanu’s rhetoric falls squarely into that category. Direct action isn’t required to be guilty of terrorism-related crimes.

You’re free to take the government to court over extrajudicial killings, but remember: if citizens are armed and confront the state, any lethal response isn’t extrajudicial. In the U.S., for example, threatening a police officer with a weapon can get you shot on the spot, that’s law enforcement, not illegal execution.

Since Tinubu took office, several governors from Southern Nigeria have defected to the ruling APC.

Fresh details have emerged revealing how President Bola Tinubu struck a secret deal with some Southern governors to conduct all elections in one day in November 2026.

SaharaReporters learnt that it is part of a broader plot to tighten control over Nigeria’s political landscape ahead of the next general polls.

Multiple credible sources told SaharaReporters that the ongoing wave of defections by governors, lawmakers, and top politicians to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) was not coincidental but part of an understanding reached during a closed-door meeting between Tinubu and several Southern governors.

Since Tinubu took office, several governors from Southern Nigeria have defected to the ruling APC.

For instance, in April 2025, Governor Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State, along with his deputy and commissioners, left the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for the APC. 


Delta State, a PDP stronghold since 1999, had never seen such a shift in its top leadership. The move was described by President Tinubu as a “political tsunami” and was celebrated by APC leaders as a major victory.

Oborevwori’s predecessor, Senator Ifeanyi Okowa, also defected to the APC, further deepening the party’s grip on the state. 

In Enugu State, Governor Peter Mbah made headlines when he defected to the APC in October 2025. 

Like Delta, Enugu had been under PDP control since the return to civilian rule in 1999. 

Bayelsa State also joined the trend, with its governor recently resigning from the PDP.

According to insiders, Tinubu assured the governors seeking re-election that his government would guarantee their return to office if they dumped their parties and joined the APC. 

In exchange, the governors reportedly proposed that all elections, that is, presidential, governorship, National Assembly, and state assembly, be held on the same day or that the presidential election be conducted last to prevent post-election betrayal.

Sources said Tinubu agreed to the one-day election proposal.

“The mass exodus of politicians to Tinubu’s APC party was hatched after a secret meeting with Southern governors, where he promised to guarantee their re-election if they all joined the APC,” one of the sources said.

“In turn, they also proposed to him that all elections should be held in one day or that the presidential election should come last so as to forestall any betrayal. Tinubu purportedly agreed to conduct the elections in one day."

According to sources, the President also consented to doing away with the electronic transmission of results from polling units, one of the key transparency features of the 2022 Electoral Act. 

Instead, results would be transmitted only from collation centres, a move observers believe would make manipulation easier at the state level.

“They agreed to do away with electronic transmission of results, but have that done at the collation centres, not the polling units,” one of the sources said. 

The idea is to have total control of the electoral process and avoid situations where early results influence later elections or spark rebellion among allies.

The plan also includes shifting the general elections from the usual February–March schedule to November 2026.

Meanwhile, the development reportedly led to a major fallout between the Tinubu administration and the former Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Mahmood Yakubu. 

According to Presidency sources, Yakubu was offered an extension of his tenure to ensure his cooperation with the 2026 plan, but he declined.

His recognition of the takeover of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and move to register new political parties infuriated powerful figures within the President’s inner circle. 

The hawks in Tinubu’s kitchen cabinet reportedly mounted intense pressure on him, leading to his abrupt exit from the Commission.

“He offended the Tinubu government with his move to register new parties and also recognising the takeover of ADC. The ferocious way the hawks in Tinubu’s kitchen cabinet came after him forced him out of INEC abruptly, leading to his resignation,” one of the sources said.

The Senate on Thursday confirmed Prof. Joash Amupitan as the new INEC Chairman after a screening session and voice vote by lawmakers.

Earlier, SaharaReporters exclusively reported that concerns within the Presidency drove Yakubu’s exit from the Commission a month before he was due to retire. 

First, he was reportedly working to register new political parties before the end of his tenure, a move said to have unsettled Tinubu’s inner circle.

Second, there were fears that he could not be “trusted” to deliver outcomes favourable to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in both the new party registration process, if at all it happens, and the upcoming Anambra election.

Imo State Governor Hope Uzodinma was said to have personally taken the matter to President Tinubu after returning from his recent overseas trip, warning that Yakubu’s continued stay could “destabilise” the APC’s plans for the 2027 electoral cycle.

Uzodinma also reported to Tinubu that Yakubu was planning to impose a close friend in Imo State, and part of the plan was to register a party he could use.

Following this meeting, Tinubu reportedly directed Yakubu to stop performing any official INEC duties and to proceed on terminal leave. However, a leak published by SaharaReporters reportedly forced a brief delay in the announcement of his removal.

https://saharareporters.com/2025/10/17/exclusive-tinubu-strikes-secret-deal-southern-governors-conduct-all-elections-one-day

I hope we are still talking terrorism? You said grave crimes.... Yes incitement may be a crime but not a grievious crime. Okay, he incited adults to commit crime that they are responsible for under the law. You can make good argument for hate speech but when it comes to actual terrorism charges been pushed against him, the government has no case. Note that the same government is also guilty of extrajudicial killings of over 100 people in the south east so try to include that and do a good job whitewashing the government in your reply if you must quote me again on this thread.

malali:
Your argument conveniently ignores a fundamental principle of law: incitement is itself a punishable act, regardless of whether the person directly wields a weapon. Nnamdi Kanu didn’t have to pull a trigger for the law to hold him responsible, he orchestrated, encouraged, and radicalized a group of people to commit violence, knowing full well the consequences. That is not opinion or debate, it is legal fact under both Nigerian law and international norms.

The idea that “they are adults, so it’s their fault” is misleading. Adults may make choices, but when someone deliberately manipulates, misleads, or provokes them into committing crimes, the instigator is legally culpable. This is why incitement to terrorism, rioting, or mass violence is treated seriously worldwide , examples abound:
• Rwandan Genocide (1994): Media figures who incited Hutus to kill Tutsis were tried for crimes against humanity, even if they never killed anyone themselves.
• Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik: His writings inciting attacks were part of the legal case against him.
• ISIS recruiters: Individuals who radicalize and encourage attacks are prosecuted for terrorism, regardless of direct participation.

So your insistence that Kanu’s lack of a firearm or direct attack absolves him is legally and morally flawed. The law doesn’t require the instigator to act physically; it punishes the creation and promotion of conditions that lead to violence.

The debate isn’t about whether Kanu “held a gun” , it’s about whether he used his influence to endanger lives and destabilize communities, which he did. That is why the government is acting against him, and why this is not a matter of personal opinion or bias, but of law and accountability.

Okay since you want to dissect Kanu's "grave crimes", I will oblige even though the government has no case against him. If I ask you what grievious crimes did Nnamdi Kanu commit, you will start by listing what he said about Mr. B on day A, what he said about group C on day D. You will end up with no hard evidence as to who he killed directly or properties he destroyed directly. I can bet that Nnamdi Kanu has not held a gun before, he did not pick a gun to shoot or kill any one. So even if we are to go by your logic that he incited people to kill policemen and burn police stations, are these people he incited minors? Are they not adults that are responsible for their own actions under the law. If they choose to kill another person, how is that Kanu's fault?

Again, I want to assume that you are as smart and intelligent as you write to understand this, except you just want to pretend like many others commenting on this thread.

malali:
It’s curious that your entire argument fixates on the mode of Nnamdi Kanu’s arrest, deliberately ignoring the grave crimes he has committed, including charges of terrorism, treasonable felony, and incitement to violence that have caused hundreds of deaths and destruction across the Southeast. The question is not only how he was brought back, but why he was evading justice for so long and putting lives at risk.

Let’s put this in perspective: international abductions of suspects or extraditions are not unprecedented, and legality often hinges on whether the person was avoiding justice. Some notable cases:

1. Carlos the Jackal (Ilich Ramírez Sánchez) – Captured in Sudan in 1994 and handed over to France. His capture was controversial, but he was wanted for multiple terrorist crimes across Europe.

2. Victor Bout (Arms Dealer) – Arrested in Thailand in a U.S.-led sting operation in 2008 and extradited. Questions were raised about sovereignty and legality, but his charges involved serious international crimes.

3. Rafael Caro Quintero (Mexican Drug Lord) – Evaded capture for decades; his eventual arrest involved cross-border operations with legal scrutiny.


4. Adolf Eichmann – Captured by Mossad in Argentina in 1960 and brought to Israel. His abduction violated Argentine law, yet was justified given the magnitude of his crimes during the Holocaust.

5. Roman Polanski (Hollywood director) – Evaded U.S. authorities for decades; his eventual arrest involved international legal wrangling and contested jurisdiction.

The point is clear: international law does provide mechanisms to bring fugitives to justice, particularly when they are actively evading trial or bail. While procedural errors can be criticized, the core issue is accountability for crimes committed.

Focusing solely on the arrest method ignores the victims, the destruction, and the rule of law. Justice isn’t suspended because someone fled; law enforcement has both a duty and precedent to ensure that individuals answer for serious crimes, even if their capture involves complex legal and diplomatic challenges.