CASE REPORT: BIAFRA v. NIGERIA [FICTION]

APPLICATION

Instituting Proceedings

Filed in the Registry of the Court on 29 August, 2000

Occupation, Exploitation and Subjugation of the Peoples Republic of Biafra by the Federal Republic of Nigeria

(Biafra v. Nigeria)

1.THE AMBASSADOR OF THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF BIAFRA TO THE NETHERLANDS TO THE REGISTRAR OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

[Translation by the Registry]

The Hague, 29 August, 2000

On behalf of the Government of the Biafran Republic and in accordance with Article 40, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Court, I have the honor to transmit herewith an Application instituting proceedings against the Federal Republic of Nigeria. In conformity with Article 40 of the Rules of Court, the Government of the Peoples Republic of Biafra has appointed as agent Mr. Ralph Adimorah, Minister of Justice and Keeper of the Seals, and as Co-Agents Messrs. Kalu Eke and Peter Nwosu, Professors of Law.

The address for service of the Agent of the Peoples Republic of Biafra is the Embassy of the Peoples Republic of Biafra in the Hague, Amaliastraat 12, 3456 JC The Hague, Netherlands.

Signed Cynthia Ikemefuna

Ambassador Plenipotentiary of Biafra

11. APPLICATION INSTITUTING PROCEEDINGS

[Translation by the Registry]

I, the undersigned, duly authorized thereto by the Government of the Peoples Republic of Biafra, of which I am the Sole Agent, have the honor to refer to the Declaration whereby the People Republic of Biafra[ herein referred to as the Biafran Republic] and the Federal Republic of Nigeria have accepted the jurisdiction of the Court under the terms of Article 36 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice and , by virtue of the jurisdiction thus conferred on the Court, to submit to it, in accordance with Article 40 of its Statute and Article 36 of its Rules, an application instituting proceedings brought by the Biafran Republic against the Republic of Nigeria in the following case.

[a] Subject of the dispute

[1]The dispute refers intimately to sovereignty over the former Eastern Region of Niger lying between the Benue River and the Atlantic Ocean. The Biafran Republic’s sovereignty which is contested by the Federal Republic of Nigeria., in so doing, the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is contesting the long established sacrosanct privileges and rights of independent states.

[2] Since the end of 1967 the contestation has taken the form of an aggression by the Federal Republic of Nigeria, whose troops are occupying all Biafran territories. This has resulted in great prejudice to the Biafran Republic, for which the Court is respectfully requested to order reparation.

[b]. The facts

[3] In 1914, the British amalgamated what was known as the Southern and Northern Protectorates of Nigeria into what is now called Nigeria, on economic and political grounds. This territory was later to become independent from Britain on October 1^st,1960.

[4] This country, Nigeria was divided into three regions for administrative purposes, and, with a federal constitution. These regions were, North, East, and West. The latter was later split into two after a plebiscite, to create the Midwestern Region.

[5] In 1966, there was a coup de etat carried out by Nigeria’s army officers which resulted in the loss of lives of the Prime Minister, the Federal Minister of Finance, the Premier of Western Region and several high ranking officers of the Nigeria Army hierarchy.

[6] The Senate President then handed over power officially and temporarily to the Head of the Nigerian Army who proceeded to suspend the federal constitution and enact a unitary one.

[7] In 1967, there was another coup de etat by elements of the Nigeria Army which also resulted in the death of the previous military head of state and an attendant pogrom and destruction of the lives and properties of citizens of Eastern Nigeria.

[8] A stalemate was hereby created with the non recognition of the new Nigeria’s military Head of State by the Eastern Region’s military governor.

[9] This resulted in a peace meeting between all the parties involved, at Aburi, Ghana. The outcome of this meeting was the issuance of the Aburi declaration which all parties to the dispute had agreed to adhere to. This Declaration was signed by the Nigerian Head of State, Yakubu Gowon, and his Biafran counterpart Odumegwu Ojukwu.

[10] It follows that, the non adherence of the Nigerian side to an accord which it duly signed, and, in conformity with the rules of international law and self preservation, the People’s Republic of Biafra was declared.

[11] On declaration of independence from Nigeria by the Biafran Republic, the Nigerian government launched a massive land, sea, and air assault on the Biafran Republic between 1967-1970. That, this war involved both an economic blockade of Biafra and an attempt to starve Biafrans into submission. This fact was admitted by a Nigerian Minister, who stated that ‘starvation was a weapon of war’.

[12] In 1970, the Biafran Government tendered an unconditional surrender to the Nigerian forces to save the lives of her existing citizens. Let it be noted that this surrender was a military option and not the surrender of the dream of a Biafran Nation.

[13] For the past 30 years, the Biafran people have been carrying ‘Biafra in their minds’., as a Nigerian agent had reminded them that ‘general amnesty is not general amnesia’.

[14] Subsequent policies of the Nigerian state has shown that Biafrans are not wanted within her body polity:

[a] Our properties have been declared abandoned within Nigeria and summarily expropriated.

[b] Our erstwhile ‘wives’ have had independent administrative structures carved out for them within Biafra, thereby breaking the mono structural hold of the Biafran Republic.

[c] There have been no attempt at reconstructing roads and industries built within Biafra before the war of aggression.

[d] No Biafran has been allowed a pivotal seat within the armed forces ruling council of Nigeria or any arm of its security services.

[e] The Nigerian government has banned the importation of freeze dried codfish [stockfish] and second hand clothing.

[f] At the end of the war , the Nigerian government paid a princely sum of twenty pounds to each Biafran irrespective of the amount of money one left behind in the bank at the outset of the war.

[g] All officers and civil servants of Biafran origin who migrated out of Nigeria at the outbreak of hostilities and the pogrom, were refused re admittance into their respective services.

[h] The Nigerian government frequently launches military offenses against unarmed Biafran civilians as witnessed at Odi and Okigwe.

[i] The Nigerian people ritually and frequently embark on the assassination of Biafrans as witnessed in Kano where one Mr. Gideon Akaluka was beheaded and his head displayed by his murderers and the recent killings of Biafrans at the Alaba International Market, Lagos, without any censure by the Nigerian government.

[j] The Nigerian government executed an environmental rights crusader Mr. Wiwa extra judicially after a kangaroo hearing.

[k] The Nigerian government has renamed certain villages in Biafra so as to marginalize the indigenes of certain ethnic nationalities in Biafra.

[l] Prevention of the American Presidents’ visit to Biafran territory by the Nigerian government.

[m] No Biafran has been given a license to lift explore, drill or lift crude oil as compared to other Nigerians and even United States citizens.

[n] The Federal Republic of Nigeria’s tacit adoption of the Shari’ah legal code in defiance of the rule of laws of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria thereby subjecting Biafrans to Muslim Laws, and, impoverishing Biafrans who have invested in the Muslim territories of the country.

111. THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT

[15]. Both the Biafran Republic and the Federal Republic of Nigeria have accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court in Conformity with Article 36 of its Statute, without any reservation.

1V. THE LEGAL GROUNDS UPON WHICH THE BIAFRAN REPUBLIC BASES ITS CASE.

[16] The Biafran Republic asserts that by taking the actions described above, the Federal Government of Nigeria has breached its express obligations under international law and has incurred international legal responsibility on account of its illegal activities, in particular its aggression against, and its occupation of the territory of an independent sovereign state. As it brings this dispute before the Court, the world should note that, Nigeria’s sovereignty over Biafra is groundless, but through the force of arms and conquest. The Biafran Republic, therefore, wishes to advance the following arguments which she intends to develop in its subsequent written and oral pleadings.

[a] Defilement of Biafra’s sovereignty and territorial integrity

[17] The Biafran Republic maintains that its sovereignty over the former territory of Eastern Nigeria is supported by several legal documents.

-The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1963.

-The Biafran Declaration of Independence 1967

[18] The prior and effective occupation of the Biafran territory by Biafrans is not open to question.

[19] The explicit recognition of Biafra by Tanzania and Haiti.

[20] The Biafran National Anthem, Flag, Currency, and Constitution [Ahiara Declaration]

[2l] The refusal of the Igwe of Nnewi, a United States visa by the American Embassy, because he applied as a traditional chief from Nigeria and not Biafra.

[b] Violation of the prohibition of the use of force

By deploying its armed forces in Biafran territories, Nigeria is violating a principle of international law affirmed in the 20^th century in the 1928 Kellog-Briand Pact. This has been proclaimed in Article 2, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the Charter of the United Nations; Charter and Article 3, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the Organization of African Unity, as well as its obligation under International Law.

V. DECISION REQUESTED

[21] From the foregoing statements of facts and legal grounds, the Biafran Republic while reserving the right to complement amend or modify the present Application in the course of the proceedings and to present to the Court a demand for the indication of provisional measures should it be proved necessary, asks the Court to judge and declare as follows:

i. That, Biafra is an independent country by virtue of international law., and that, the Nigerian state should cease forthwith the forced occupation of Biafra.

ii. That, the Nigerian state should pay the sum of $30 billion to the Biafran government as compensation for the exploitation of oil reserves in Biafra.

iii. That, the Nigerian government should cease forthwith the trial of MASSOB freedom fighters for treason.

iv. That, the said MASSOB fighters should be treated as prisoners of war, and the International Red Cross organization should have access to the said men.

(Not signed) Ralph Adimorah

Agent of the Peoples Republic of Biafra, Minister of Justice and Keeper of Seals.

(Not signed) Peter Nwosu

Co-Agent of the Peoples Republic of Biafra, Professor of International Law.

Signatures certified genuine.

(Not signed) Cynthia Ikemefuna

Ambassador Plenipotentiary of the Peoples Republic of Biafra.

This is a fictitious creation, all names are fallacious and characters impersonated.

Orok Edem

The writer is a New York based cabbie