<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"> <a href="http://www.radiobiafra.co/">BILIE HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE HAS NO MANDATE AND AS SUCH DOES NOT REPRESENT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF BIAFRA(IPOB)</a><br /> <br /> It is interesting that Bilie Human Rights Initiative (herein after BHRI) backed by practising barrister(s) will choose when to act in accordance with the law and when not to.We continue to remind you that an agreement signed  under the law was blatantly breached by BHRI and its lawyers and they turned around to cry foul.It is also important to remind you that the EDICTS of the 'Supreme Council of Elders' was and is the exclusive machination and arrangement of operators of BHRI and NOT BASED ON THE BROAD BASED CONSULTATION AND AUTHORISATION OF THE PEOPLE OF BIAFRA AND SO ONLY A HANDFUL OF THOSE WHO ARE THEIR MEMBERS AND THOSE WHO SUBSCRIBE TO THEIR METHOD ARE BOUND.<br /> <br /> The question then is: where does the 'Council of Elders' got their mandate?From a Human Rights organisation called BHRI or the Indigenous People of Biafra?Who constituted the Customary court? The records are there. You see, it is better that you have a deep breath and look for a way of rectifying the BUNDLE ILLEGALITY that BHRI is and has been presiding over.If you want to practice law, practice it in all its ramifications.<br /> <br /> The usual quote ''No pro-Biafra activists or groups under the authority of Bilie Human Rights Initiative and the Supreme Council of Elders has ever been arrested, molested.....'', is laughable and most insincere in the strictest sense. First and by this, you have already identified that there are pro-Biafra activists or groups under the 'authority' of BHRI and her 'Supreme Council of Elders'(not the Council of Elders of IPOB) and there are those who are not.Now as a rational being, why not leave those who are not under your authority alone to go about their activities? This is because you got it wrong in the first place when you insisted that Biafra can only be restored via LEGAL means and no other method thereby excluding others who do not believe in your legal method or to say the least who believe that all options must be on the table. It is bizarre to insist that independence can only be achieved through the law court even when every available records in history of nationhood suggest<br /> otherwise.Since you limit yourselves you cannot limit others and you cannot constitute an obstacle on the way of others (you cannot force people to come under 'BHRI and the Supreme Council of Elders').Doing so as you can imagine amounts to direct provocation and nobody will want to witness the consequences of that.<br /> <br /> Furthermore, when you say that nobody has been arrested as a result of BHRI being in court  (with its members and truly not on behalf of every Indigenous Biafran) for you can only represent those who are your members, it then begs the question which is: how can you or anybody be arrested by the Nigeria government where you observe, and pay allegiance to Nigerian constitution and adhere and obey the Nigerian law to the letter? Since you obey Nigerian law, why then are you claiming to be FIGHTING OR ADVOCATING FOR BIAFRA? How can Nigerian government arrest or molest you where in fact and indeed you have literally you have not broken any of her laws.Can't you see that there is something fundamentally wrong with 'justice obtained against the TRUTH' ( Ikpe mara eziokwu na aka azu di ya)? Simple and direct, what you are doing  is not freedom fighting because Independence cannot and has never been achieved via the court albeit via the oppressor's court.<br /> <br /> Again, to continue to feed your followers with incorrect legal information is a mark of irresponsibility and indeed it is for those who are card carrying members of BHRI and not for the Indigenous People of Biafra as a people. The truth is that there is body of principles or laws in international law.In other words, there is no codified principles or rules called 'international Law' for people to obey. What you have there are state practices or customs and treaties(which binds the signatories only) and of course the UN security council resolutions(enforced mostly through the use of force) and,expert legal opinions of  jurists and legal scholars and the decisions of the international court of Justice (herein after ICJ) (these decisions are for disputes between independent states brought before the court). The conduct of states in international relations or system is not as a result of law but as a matter of choice and indeed on the 'permanent interests' of states. Rosalyn Higgins(a renowned<br /> international jurist in her book: Problems and process, international and how we use it) clearly stated that 'international law is not rules.It is a normative system.' The support for Biafra like any other can only be got through a combination of factors which are many of politics and choice of states among others.The next question therefore is: who can bring a case before the International Court of Justice(ICJ)?<br /> <br /> And here are the answers:<br /> <br /> Only States are eligible to appear before the Court in contentious cases.  At present, this basically means the 192 United Nations Member States.<br /> <br /> ''The Court has no jurisdiction to deal with applications from individuals, non-governmental organizations, corporations or any other private entity.  It cannot provide them with legal counselling or help them in their dealings with the authorities of any State whatever.However, a State may take up the case of one of its nationals and invoke against another State the wrongs which its national claims to have suffered at the hands of the latter;  the dispute then becomes one between States.'' (available at:http://www.icj-cij.org/information/index.php?p1=7&p2=2) .<br /> <br /> As can be seen above, only an independent state/Country can take BHRI's case against Nigeria to the ICJ as BHRI including its 'Council of Elders' has no right to TAKE NIGERIA TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE(ICT).The case is already dead on the grounds and questions of merit and admissibility.Nigeria,which you obey its constitution and laws and who is incidentally and bizarrely your oppressor definitely cannot take itself to the ICJ. Only an independent country can take your case to the ICJ and the question again is: how do you get this country to support you? The answer lies in the sphere of INTERNATIONAL POLITICS and MANOEUVRING and not in the COURT OF YOUR OPPRESSOR, NIGERIA. Furthermore, BHRI and its 'SUPREME COUNCIL OF ELDERS' and their followers are indeed Nigerians in fact and indeed who obey the Nigerian law and therefore coming out to the world to announce that they are freedom fighters and agitators for Biafra makes mockery of the Biafra Independence struggle.You do not<br /> confront Nigeria, you do not break any law by going to court to literally beg, you are merely making a legal argument which the Nigerian court is ever ready to continue to entertain till eternity and  to use it to exercise their minds for legal researchers and scholars among them and indeed among legal researchers  of BHRI. Biafra does not want research(enough has been researched on her), she wants freedom fighters for her liberation.It wants raw political process to drive this home simple!<br /> <br /> <br /> Finally and put succinctly,the case that BHRI is pursuing against the Nigerian government is fundamentally flawed in every ramifications and BHRI is definitely NOT REPRESENTING THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF BIAFRA AS A PEOPLE, IT IS BASICALLY, IF ANYTHING, REPRESENTING THOSE BIAFRANS WHO ARE THEIR MEMBERS AND THE 'SUPREME COUNCIL OF ELDERS' IS SOLELY FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNDER BHRI AS A HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION.<br /> <br /> It may also interest everyone who cares to note that Ezu River incidence happened under the direct watch of BHRI and her Supreme Council of Elders, the continuous bombing and slaughtering our Biafran brethrens in Nigeria are and have been taking place under the watchful eyes of BHRI, The socalled ELDERS OF BHRI are represented at jamboree called NATIONAL CONFERENCE but nobody has heard them spoke out about the killings our people and indeed Biafra Indepence. and so on.If BHRI and her supreme council of elders are defending the Biafran people, the question is: how many cases have they prosecuted on behalf of Biafrans?How many BOKO HARAM bomb victims and their families have BHRI obtained justice for? Have they obtained justice for the Ezu River victims and what are they doing about it? You see, men in BHRI and her Council of elders are always looking for easy way out and riding on the back of others to achieve publicity which are purely self-centred. Come out and make sacrifice for Biafra freedom.. Freedom is not given, it is taken.Biafrans and the world are watching and very soon will know who is who.<br /> <div> <br /></div> </div>

BILIE HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE HAS NO MANDATE AND AS SUCH DOES NOT REPRESENT THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF BIAFRA(IPOB) It is interesting that ...

Read more »