There’s no justification allowing Abaribe, Ekweremadu walk free while Ndume is in prison? — Northern groups

There’s no justification allowing Abaribe, Ekweremadu walk free while Ndume is in prison? — Northern groups

The detention of Senator Ali Ndume has been named by a party under the aegis of the Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG) as evidence of bias and a “planned cage of Northern extraction politicians as the 2023 elections gather momentum.”

While responding to the court order remanding Ndume in Kuje Prison because of his failure to produce the former chairman of the defunct Pension Reform Task Team (PRTT) Abdurasheed Maina, the group led by one Nastura Sheriff wondered why Senator Enynnanya Abaribe and former Senate President Ike Ekwerenmadu, who stood as security for the leader of the Indigenous Peoples, were not given the same treatment.

In a statement signed by the Secretary General of the CNG, Abdulaziz Suleiman, the organization claimed that Ndume’s detention was a questionable illegality both under the law and in practice.

They noted the “dangerous precedent set by the obvious biase ruling of the court that ordered the Senator’s detention.”

“The evidence of bias is apparent in the order for Ndume’s detention while Senator Abaribe, former Deputy Senate President Ekweremmadu and others who stood as sureties for Nnamdi Kanu who was standing trial for treason, were not ordered to forfeit the bail terms or sent to prison,” the statement reads.

“This order further confirms the concerns for an entrenched moral corruption in the nation’s criminal justice administration system that is twisted to suit certain sectional interests of judges.

“Otherwise, there is no justification whatsoever, that a court, presumably the temple of justice, applying same laws differently on citizens of the same country based on ethnic or sectional favours.

“The CNG frowns at the unprofessional impunity displayed by some judges, and we want to remind the nation’s justice administrators that the law will fail to protect the society if it allows fanciful considerations to deflect the course of justice.

“There is nothing more biased than a situation where people of certain sections are not called to forfeit bail bonds or sent to jail for standing sureties to the leader of a terrorist group who also jumped bail, while enforcing same on another person who stood surety for a financial offender, just because he comes from an unfavoured section of the same country.”