Welcome To Rising Sun TV Blog

Gen. Yakubu Gowon in 1967 thought he could invade Enugu,
arrest Ojukwu and place him on trial. A mission he could not
accomplish in 3 three years.


As soon as Gowon realized that Gen. Ojukwu and his boys
were not smiling or easy to conquer, Gowon committed 3
crimes against Nigerians just to win the war. These are the
sins of Gowon that are affecting Nigerians today.


1. THE GODOGODO

Gowon and his supreme military council thought it would be
easy to walk over Biafra and capture Ojukwu so they decided
to launch attack on Enugu to capture Ojukwu. That attempt
met with stiff resistance from unarmed youths to the
surprise of Gowon and his army.
Mauritala, that beast and a bigot in his zealousness made 2
attempts to take over Onitsha but was successfully stopped
by Ojukwu soldiers. This frustration led to a quick fix that
would lead to the worst pact with the devil himself.


In other to aid the federal army, Mauritala Mohammed
convinced Gowon to bring the foreign militias called the
godogodo people to fight Biafra. Those who lived or
witnessed and or fought in the civil war are not strange to
the atrocities of these people.
They were heartless militias paid to kill and praised for their
ruthlessness. Although the Godogodo people were not
trained professional regular soldiers, their duty was to do
the military’s dirty job.


Massacre civilians, rape and slaughter the already
conquered people with hatchet, axe and other dangerous
instruments. They are also experts in torture. Anywhere the
federal troop’s conquered, they will bring the godogodo
people to finish off the civilians.
So in some instances the civilians were warned to flee the
cities before the godogodo people would arrive. These
Godogodo people were not repatriated after the civil war.


Most of them settled in northern Nigeria. The government
lost control of them.
It is the same Godogodo militias that constitute today’s
Fulani herdsmen terrorist group. Those in the east who
witnessed the war will testify about the Godogodo people
named after a village in Kaduna of today.
So The Fulani herdsmen are the offshoot or the continuation
of the Godogodo people Gowon brought to Nigeria to kill
Biafrans. Today they have become the errant virus that eats
what it was supposed to protect.

2. Months into the war, Gowon saw that Biafra could not be
conquered unless Port Harcourt fell into federal hands, so
he went into pact with the president of Cameron. In the pact,
Gowon pledged Bakassi peninsula in exchange if Cameron
allowed Nigeria to use its sea route to get to Port Harcourt.


We are all aware of how many innocent people that died
since the war ended because of this pact. Today the entire
people of Bakassi are displaced and no one is talking about
them.


3. THE GRAZING ROUTE.

When Gowon and his military found out that Biafra is not a
pushover, he entered into another contract. This time he
went to Niger for the help of the Arabs in Africa. In other for
Chad and Niger to give the federal government the help they
sought, Niger and its allies, Benin republic and Chad Fulanis
stated their conditions.
That condition was to grant to the Fulani nomads a grazing
route from Niger to the Eastern Nigeria. Again Gowon
without brains accepted this demand and signed off the
arable land of Nigeria to the Fulanis for grazing.


Now if you have been listening or reading what the leaders
of Miyatti Allah have been saying you would notice one
constant claim. They insist that there is international
document that granted them grazing route from Niger to
Eastern Nigeria.


Of all those banning the open grazing, no one has
challenged this claim. Did such document exist? Who are
the signatories? Was it rectified after the war in which Gown
and the supreme military council was in charge for 6 years
after the war?


Now we can see why those who fought the civil war and
looted Nigeria thereafter are criminally silent over this
predicament. The Fulanis claim that Allah gave them our
ancestral land to graze. It is clear who the Allah is… Gen.
Yakubu Gowon is the Allah that gave our land to the Fulanis.
The fact staring us in the face now is that the federal
government cannot and will not protect us. Unless we resist
this as one robbed people these vampires will suck us dry.


They are brutes and experts in fiendish diplomacy, so
dialoguing with them or making any pact with them is a
waste of time. They understand one language, violence,
brute force, like the vampires if you do not overwhelm them
with brute force they will never stop coming.


Arise people of Nigeria and resist this slavery Gowon signed
us into. As for those who felt they defeated Biafra, how far?
As for those clamouring for true federalism or restructuring,
none will solve this problem. The only solution is to kill
Nigeria. Total disintegration will resolve this nonsense as
each nation will make its own laws and protect its territorial
integrity.


Onyema Uche writes from Washington DC, United States.

By Anayo Okoli

UMUAHIA —OHANAEZE Youth Wing, OYW,  is set to revolt
against the President-General of Ohanaeze , Chief John
Nnia Nwodo, accusing him of plotting to throw Ndigbo
into what they called “a political cul-de –sac,” by allegedly
trying to unilaterally adopt a northern presidential
aspirant.


OYW also accused the Ohanaeze president of running the
body as a one-man business, alleging that he has
rendered the office of the Secretary General of the body
impotent, which they said is the engine room of the
organisation and custodian of Ohanaeze Secretariat.


They claimed that he appointed a director of
administration without the approval of the Ime Obi and
the appointee has usurped the powers of Secretary
General.


“Ohanaeze Ndigbo is a social cultural organisation but he
has converted into a political organisation as he already
has a presidential candidate from the North East and is
trying to impose him on Ndigbo through his deceitful
message on restructuring, and subsequently, bring his
brother or one of his friends as the running mate ahead of
other qualified Igbos,” OYW alleged.


Ohanaeze youths wing in a statement signed by Mazi
Okechukwu Isiguzoro, its President General and Mazi
Okwu Nnabuike, the Secretary General, said: “We, the
Ohanaeze Youth Wing, OYW, presently at the receiving
end of Nwodo’s political forays are not in a haste to
adopt or support any presidential candidate to avoid a
repeat of the Igbo’s mistake of 2015. Hence, we reject his
moves and pressure.


“We believe in popular governance as the name Ohanaeze
Ndigbo suggests and would like the Igbo leaders of
thoughts and South East governors in league with
Ohanaeze Ndigbo to show the way rather one man
dictating the direction.”

Donald Tusk says negotiations on other
issues will not progress until the Ireland
question has been dealt with



The EU has thrown down an ultimatum to Theresa
May in Brexit talks, warning that it will not open
discussions about trade or other issues until the
Irish border question is solved.


Speaking in Dublin alongside the Irish Prime
Minister Leo Varadkar, European Council President
Donald Tusk said talks would be a case of “Ireland
first” and that “the risk of destabilising the fragile
peace process must be avoided at all costs”.

“We know today that the UK Government rejects a
customs and regulatory border down the Irish Sea,
the EU single market, and the customs union,” the
Mr Tusk said.

“While we must respect this position, we also
expect the UK to propose a specific and realistic
solution to avoid a hard border.

“As long as the UK doesn’t present such a solution,
it is very difficult to imagine substantive progress in
Brexit negotiations.

“If in London someone assumes that the
negotiations will deal with other issues first before
the Irish issue, my response would be: Ireland first.”

British negotiators have long been keen to move to
discussions about trade and had hoped to do so
after the March meeting of the European Council in
two weeks, but Mr Tusk’s latest ultimatum
suggests further delays could be in store.

The EU
says a withdrawal agreement must be negotiated
by October to give it time to ratify the deal before
the UK falls out of the bloc in March 2019.

Mr Tusk recalled that the Good Friday Agreement,
whose 20th anniversary is next month, had been
“ratified by huge majorities north and south of the
border”.


“We must recognise the democratic decision taken
by Britain to leave the EU in 2016 – just as we must
recognise the democratic decision made on the
island of Ireland in 1998 with all its consequences,”
he said, in a play on the rhetoric used by Brexiteers
regarding the 2016 EU referendum.

The EU27 nations granted the UK “sufficient
progress” to move to the rest of Brexit talks in the
December meeting of the European Council after
the UK made a commitment to avoid a hard border
on the island of Ireland at all costs.

The joint report agreed by both sides stated that
the UK would maintain regulatory alignment with
the EU to prevent a hard border – unless another
solution could be found, either specifically for
Ireland, or as part of the wider trade deal.


Since that agreement, however, the UK has ruled
out a trade deal solution by reiterating its
commitment to leave the customs union and single
market, has ruled out a customs border between
the province and Great Britain, and has not
produced detailed specific proposals for avoiding a
hard border.

 Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has
also poured cold water on the issue, downplaying
the UK’s commitment to avoiding a hard border in a
letter to the PM.

(Dateline, Berlin, March 2018):

In a landmark ruling on March 8, 2018, the African
Commission on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR) issued
a ruling against President Buhari to cease and desist from
taking any "further actions" against Nnamdi Kanu, IPOB and
its members, pending when the Commission renders final
decision on a Complaint filed on behalf of Mazi Nnamdi
Kanu and IPOB.


The ruling, which the Commission called 'provisional
measures', emanated from a Complaint filed by Barrister
Aloy Ejimakor of Adulbert Legal Services on behalf of
Nnamdi Kanu and IPOB on December 14, 2017.

The Complaint placed three main issues for the
consideration of the Commission, to wit: Nnamdi Kanu's
trial, Operation Python Dance and its aftermaths in the
Southeast of Nigeria including the military invasion of
Nnamdi Kanu's family home in Umuahia, and declaration of
IPOB as a terrorist organization.


The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights,
which reports to the African Union (AU) is a quasi-judicial
body tasked with promoting and protecting human rights
and collective (peoples') rights throughout the African
continent as well as interpreting the African Charter on
Human and Peoples' Rights and adjudication of individual
complaints brought before the Commission against member
States.
Nigeria is a member State and has also ratified the African
Charter, which all together makes it subject to the
jurisdiction of ACHPR.

In the ruling, the Commission also states that it has
assumed jurisdiction to adjudicate the IPOB Complaint, and
gave President Buhari 15 days to respond with actions he
has taken to implement the provisional measures ordered by
the Commission.

On a rather ominous note, the Commission wrote that if the
allegations in the Complaint prove to be correct, they would
amount to gross violations of the African Charter "as well as
other regional and international human rights laws and
standards".


With this ruling and the expectation that Buhari is duty-
bound to implement it, Nnamdi Kanu, IPOB and it's
members have been vindicated, at least as far as the
declaration that IPOB is a terrorist organization now
appears to be on hold, until such a time the Commission has
rendered its final decision.

The ruling which spanned three pages was addressed to
President Buhari; and it is accompanied by another five
pages of document containing analysis of the Complaint.


Going forward, we remain committed in our pursuit of
justice both within and outside Nigeria. We will not relent
until those responsible for the murder of hundreds of
peaceful agitators and the disappearance of our leader is
held to account before the comity of civilised nations.


Signed:
Mazi Chika Edoziem
Head of Directorate of State of the Indigenous People of
Biafra

A Nigerian jurist at the International Criminal Court
(ICC) has been elected president of the war crimes
tribunal.

Chile Eboe-Osuji, who became the first Nigerian to be
elevated to the court in 2012, would serve as ICC
president for the next three years.


The announcement was contained in a statement
posted on ICC website on Sunday.

See the full statement below:

“On the 11th March 2018, the judges of the International
Criminal Court (ICC), sitting in a plenary session,
elected Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji (Nigeria) as President
of the Court for a three-year term with immediate
effect. Judge Robert Fremr(Czech Republic) was
elected First Vice-President and Judge Marc Perrin de
Brichambaut (France) Second Vice-President.”

The new appointee was also quoted in the statement.
“I am deeply honoured to have been elected by my
peers as President of the International Criminal Court.

As I take up my duties, I feel encouraged that I am able
to rely on the wide experience of the two Vice-
Presidents, Judge Robert Fremr and Judge Marc Perrin
de Brichambaut, both of whom I have closely worked
with previously.


“I look forward to working together with them as well
as with all the judges, all the Officials and the staff of
the Court in a spirit of collegiality. I also look forward to
collaborating with the Assembly of States Parties, civil
society and the international community at large, acting
together to strengthen and reinforce the Rome Statute
system, the 20th anniversary of the adoption of which
we celebrate this year”, President Chile Eboe-Osuji
stated following the election.

“I am also grateful to the previous President, Judge
Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi, and Vice-Presidents,
Judges Joyce Aluoch and Kuniko Ozaki, for their work
and leadership,” he added.

The Presidency – consisting of the President and the
two Vice-Presidents – plays a key role in providing
strategic leadership to the ICC as a whole.

The Presidency coordinates with the other organs and
seeks the concurrence of the Prosecutor on matters of
mutual concern. In accordance with the Rome Statute,
the ICC’s governing treaty, the Presidency is
responsible for the proper administration of the Court,
with the exception of the Office of the Prosecutor.

The Presidency oversees the activities of the Registry
and provides input into a broad range of administrative
policies affecting the Court’s overall functioning.

Furthermore it conducts judicial review of certain
decisions of the Registrar and concludes Court-wide
cooperation agreements with States and international
organisation.

By Rose Moses

At the Senate the other week, another controversial
subject was thrown into the political space as Senator
Aliyu Sabi Abdullahi (APC, Niger) proposed a Bill seeking
for establishment of an Independent National
Commission for Hate Speeches.
The Bill also prescribes death sentence for any person
found guilty of any form of hate speech that results in the
death of another person upon conviction.





Hate Speech
Similarly in August last year, Vice President Yemi
Osinbajo, then acting President, had at a function,
described hate speech as a specie of terrorism.

According to him, hate speech employs violence and
intimidation to achieve certain political objectives and as
such, said offenders would be punished under the Terror
Act.


The Bill by Senator Abdulahi, who by the way, is
spokesperson of the upper legislative chamber, among
other things, reads that :“A person who uses, publishes,
presents, produces, plays, provides, distributes and/or
directs the performance of any material, written and/or
visual, which is threatening, abusive or insulting or
involves the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words
or behaviour, commits an offence, if such person intends
thereby to stir up ethnic hatred, or having regard to all the
circumstances, ethnic hatred is likely to be stirred up
against any person or person from such an ethnic group
in Nigeria.”





Expectedly, the bill has stimulated discourse in many
quarters, with some Nigeria’s, ever suspicious of the
Nigerian legislators, wondering whose interest Abdulahi
was actually trying to protect with the Bill.
And for this category of Nigerians, they would like Sen.
Abdulahi to look inward and at the policies of the APC led
Federal Government, which most have alleged rode on
the back of hate speech to power, and which they term as
founder and inventor of hate speeches in present day
Nigeria.




Hate speech, they further claim, was also boosted by
President Muhammadu Buhari’s statement at an
international forum where he said it will not be possible to
treat those who gave him “97 per cent vote” same way as
those that gave him “five per cent.”

And as if to confirm the above statement made at the
United States Institute of Peace (USIP) in Washington DC
couple of months after he was sworn in as president,
appointments into key positions and handling of other
national issues in the Buhari government, have been
glaringly lopsided.





That apart, the way and manner the Federal Government
treated agitations by the Indigenous People of Biafra
(IPOB) when compared to what obtains in the ongoing
deadly attacks by Fulani herdsmen in the country easily
defines bias.


When it comes to the war against corruption, a senator
and actually a member of the president’s All Progressives
Congress (APC) party, Shehu Sani, satirically describes
the president’s apparent predisposition, saying when
members of the president’s circle are involved, the case
is treated with some nice smelling perfume but when
opposition members are involved, government deploys
the use of insecticide.
Little wonder therefore that any criticism of this
administration’ inadequacies, or actions and inactions are
usually labeled as hate speech, which largely goes to
explain why the proposed Bill has been hugely condemned
and said to be in bad faith, even when that may not be so.





A legislative lobbyist/consultant, Akinloye Oyeniyi MLS, in
a chat, however, said the proposed Bill is one of those
that will not go far on the floor of the red chamber
because the hate speech, which it seeks to address, is
already taken care of under slander, libel, treasonable
felony and other crimes.


In the same token, the commission it seeks to establish is
duplication of the statutory functions of the National
Human Rights Commission.
Obviously in law making process, there are preliminary
considerations drafters and sponsors of Bills must adhere
to, among which are conformity with the constitution in
the area of supremacy, legislative competence,
fundamental objectives and directive of principles of state
policy, fundamental rights, and auster clauses, said
Oyeniyi.


In other words, a proposed Bill must not be in conflict
with any existing law, policy or case law, just as customs
and religious factors, as well as implementation are put
into consideration.

Thus, going by the the contents of the proposed Bill by
Senator Abdulahi, it would seem it is already dead on
arrival for the simple reason that it is in conflict with the
Constitution, existing laws like Criminal Act and Penal
Codes and the National Human Rights Commission
(NHRC) Act.





What Nigeria desperately needs right now are laws that
will entrench peace, justice and good governance; laws
that will holistically address the three monsters of
insecurity, corruption and impunity, currently holding the
nation down.

When that is done, things like hate speeches will certainly
no longer be an issue, since hate speeches hardly thrive
in peaceful and just environment, where everyone feels a
sense of belonging.

Recall that yesterday, President Buhari pledged to help
Ghana in its fight against corruption.

President Buhari
made the pledge during his speech at the country's 61st
Independence day celebration yesterday March 6th.






Senator Ben Murray-Bruce took to his twitter handle to
react to President Buhari's promise.