Plot to disrupt Anambra poll: Court orders service of processes on Kanu, IPOB

A Federal High Court in Abuja has directed that court processes (documents) be served on Nnamdi Kanu and his group, Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), on a suit seeking to restrain them from disrupting the November 18 governorship election in Anambra State.



Justice Babatunde Quadri gave the order for service of court processes on the respondents after listening to the arguments by the plaintiff’s lawyer, Smart Iheazor, for leave to serve the processes on Kanu and IPOB outside Abuja.

Other respondents in the suit are: the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), the Commandant General of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF).

The plaintiff, Dr Richard Ndubuaku, who described himself as businessman in Awka, AnambrA State capital, with property in Onitsha and other parts of the state, prayed the court to restrain Kanu, IPOB, their agents and members from making utterances or taking actions that are inimical to the conduct of the November 18 poll.

He also prayed the court to restrain Kanu and IPOB from further harassing or intimidating eligible voters in Anambra State or mobilising their members to scuttle the planned election.

Ndubuaku argued that there was need for the court to grant the orders he sought because Kanu and members of his group could carry out their threat to disrupt the election, if not restrained.

The businessman noted that if allowed to proceed with their threat, Kanu and IPOB members could cause irreparable damage to him and other innocent residents of Anambra State.

The plaintiff, in a supporting affidavit, averred that Kanu and other IPOB members “have serially made utterances and threats to disrupt the conduct of the governorship election in Anambra State this November”.

He added: “The respondents (first and second) are capable of carrying out their threat. And if this happens, many lives will be lost. And properties (will be) destroyed, which will include that of the plaintiff.

“If the defendants are not restrained, their actions may lead to confrontation. With other law-abiding citizens, who insist on electing their governor and a clash with the defendants will occasion a blood bath as there would be a breakdown of law and order.”