Admin

DPA deliberately runs a two-step membership program. In the era of social media, it is easy for people to pose to be who they are not. This has been very devastating in a country like Nigeria with poor personal identification system. It is difficult to know a person based on his or her social media profile. We therefore, almost by default, created a two level identification system. First, we allow a person to join any of the DPA social media forums - Facebook, Twitter or Instagram. It is relatively easy to join. All you need is to have a social media account that is at least 6 months old, with some evidence of genuine activities or you need to be invited. Once you join our forum, you are expected to learn more about our programs and our discussions and to meet, interact with other forum members. Eventually, a forum member has to determine how to move to the next level. If you want to expand your engagement with our organization, you will need to become a registered member. Given, that you have been a member of our forum, you are pre-qualified to become a registered member. This two-layered membership system has helped us. But no system is fail proof. So, we do make mistakes. Once in a while, we let into the forum very toxic people with the capacity to pollute anything they touch. We had such experience yesterday. One lady recently invited by a member to join the forum went wild today. Out of the blues, she claimed she was an original member of this forum, but she left when she found that the Founder was a fraudulent man. She claimed that this forum has 2 million members but only 100 people comment on posts. She claimed that the Founder is not awaiting trial, but has been convicted of murder. Of course, other forum members who read her outrageous claims were surprised how such a person was allowed in here. But that is our system. We screen backwards. That is, we give you chance to show that you can't belong here before we take you out. At the same time, we are not really threatened by such behavior because the person is not a registered member. That's the beauty of the double layer system of membership.

In a piece shared with its forum members, the organization differentiates itself from other popular social media groups. The piece titled "DPA does not measure membership participation by comments to posts" which was posted on the organization's Facebook reads as follows: DPA DOES NOT MEASURE MEMBERSHIP PARTICIPATION BY COMMENTS TO POSTS December 15, 2019 Once in a while, you come across critics who try to measure DPA Forum membership engagement by the number of comments to our posts. But that is a very wrong approach that reflects ignorance of what DPA is and how this forum works. Such critics are basically comparing DPA to Igboist or Rants Headquarters and such other groups. In those other groups, their goal is to excite reactions from as many as possible members. They do so based on the type of topics they discuss. For instance, a member of Igboist may make a post of just one sentence such as: "Have you ever been disappointed by someone you loved?" If you publish that as a post, everybody has something to say. So you can expect 90% of their group members to have an opinion or experience to share on the subject. However, it is different in DPA. For instance, if a law professor posts a professional or scholarly article on Prenuptial Agreements, you don't expect a lot of people to have experience or opinions to share on the subject. Yet 99% of the group members learned something from the post. DPA aims to discuss serious subjects and to teach law and related subjects to our members. Indeed, it will be abnormal for us if 2000 people were to express an opinion on any of our posts. The reason is that we take time to go through people's reactions to our posts in order to address any issues and clarify points raised by them. What we expect from our members most of the time are questions, not their own opinions on the subject matter of the post. And to minimize the questions, we try to use simple language and straightforward illustrations to discuss the subject matter. Take for instance the first post yesterday on prenuptial. We deliberately used the illustration of a tailor, custom-made or ready-made clothes in order to make easy for an average person to reason along as he reads the post. We were just trying to reduce the number of people who would have questions based on the fact that they did not understand the post. When we make a post, we measure participation in three different ways: (1) How many people learned something new from the post? We estimate that 99% of members who read a typical post would have learned one thing new or the other from it. (2) How many people had questions on the post based on comments received? We are disappointed when many people have questions based on comments because it means we did not explain the subject thoroughly. (3) How many people came to us inbox with requests for our help with the personal problems they have had on related issues? For instance, over 20 people have contacted us privately with personal questions on prenuptial, after reading our post yesterday. Another thing to bear in mind is that over 75% of DPA posts are done by professionals who have formal training on the subject of the post. So, most of the time if you react to a post on DPA, you are reacting to a post by a professional. It is not like in the other groups where anybody can post on any subject. In those groups, a shoemaker can post his views on constitutional law and all the shoemakers in the world will join with their own opinions on constitutional law. Yes, certainly we encourage more engagements from our forum members. But bear in mind that we are not like other groups that measure progress by the number of people they have talking at the same time. We prefer that our members read 50 quality comments than to have to wade through a thousand comments that are meaningless beyond their comic value.

Minutes after the conviction of Senator Orji Uzor Kalu by a Lagos based Federal High Court on December 5, 2019, Nigerians showed mixed reactions. Some people saw the conviction as justice done. Others saw it as a selective and politically motivated legal outcome. And both sides have good reasons for their different positions. Without a doubt, every Nigerian political office holder, particularly the Governors and the Presidents, since 1999, has engaged in one form of corrupt enrichment or another. The Governors were handed huge unaccountable funds and allowed unconstitutional control over the budgetary allocations meant for local governments and the state judiciary. Lawmakers were allowed to allocate to themselves irrational amounts of allowances and control over what has been described as constituency projects. There was no restrictions on campaign financing. Thus the Nigerian politicians were handed a cart blanch to steal as much as they could, and everyone of them stole a lot. Along with the new era of unbridled corruption came a unique system of selective and politically motivated enforcement of the criminal laws of the country. The major agencies to fight corruption and economic crimes in Nigeria turned out to be mere instruments of control of any political opposition. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the leading agency to fight economic crimes (not necessarily corruption, as that was meant to be the responsibility of the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC)) targeted exclusively opponents of the President. When the EFCC realized that the constitutional immunity from prosecution while in office granted the Governors some temporal protection, it aimed at initiating impeachments of those Governors, even if it meant violating the constitution. With such a terrible record of impunity, Nigeria's war against corruption lost much credibility and remained perceived as a system of selective justice and instrument of political control. With this in mind, many view the occasional conviction of a politician with a justified degree of scepticism. Applying such scepticisms to Kalu's conviction, the question is: What really is the political motivation for the development? People may point to the fact that the trial lasted for twelve years in order to exclude any sudden game. However, sound logic suggests the opposite. When a criminal trial lasts for a long time, the prosecution serves as a ready instrument of all manner of political control. This is particularly so in the face of judicial corruption and the absence of independence of the judiciary. Thus, a phone call from the Presidency to the judge can achieve any outcome the caller intended. Why would Kalu be a good target for such political game at this time? The only but quite crucial motive has to do with Orji Kalu and Igbo presidency in 2023. If the ruling APC were to commit to Igbo presidency in 2023, Orji Uzor Kalu would be one of the most viable presidential candidates. Kalu knew this and had carefully positioned himself in the ruling party. If there were a powerful enough splinter force determined to frustrate the idea of Igbo presidency or any ambition on the part of Kalu come 2023, the 12 year old pending trial is the best means of accomplishing that. Call the judge from the presidency. DPA does not by any means impugn the judgment of Honorable Justice Idris. However, the following statement in the judgment remains susceptible to various interpretations. The judge stated as part of his judgment: “No gaps were left unfilled. This is the acceptable standard. I hold the view that the prosecution has established its case against the defendants; it did not fall short of the standard required by law in money laundering offences. It is clear upon the facts before this court that the prosecution had this case conclusively investigated before opting to bring this charge against the defendants. In other words, the prosecution did an in-depth and conclusive investigation". The charge was actually brought 12 years before the conviction. This statement can reasonably be construed as a political statement that was calculated to preempt any complaint of ulterior motivation or corruption against the judge or the EFCC. Indeed, such statement is unnecessary and need not be included in a judgment that has gone in favor of the prosecution. Ordinarily, a conviction would have been sufficient to show that the court accepted that the prosecution met the requisite standard of proof. The needless effort to uphold his own judgment is suggestive of discomfort on the mind of the judge.

Whether we agree or not, it is inevitable that the society will be worse off, if there is no consequence for false statements calculated to destabilize and unsettle the society. I just have an example of such statement in the screenshot here. Somebody made that false statement without caring how it affects the members of the Catholic faith. In fact, the maker of that statement calculated to hurt and offend the Catholics for no just cause. To say there should not be consequence for such statements is to place the society in danger. Yes, we suspect our government people and we fear that any move against hate speech only serves to protect officials from public criticisms. But in truth, anti-hate laws will protect the vulnerable poor from manipulative media contents the more. That is to say, hate speeches hurt the poor more that they can hurt the rich, who are less dependent on other's approval, more able to counter manipulative contents, better educated to resist the influence of false stories, and better able to purchase goodwill where it has been dented by false manipulative contents. So, anti-hate laws should be supported by all, but with more efficient sanctions. It is thus inevitable.  

ORJI UZOR KALU BACK IN ABUJA He was convicted in Lagos. He was ordinarily meant to serve his 12-year sentence in Lagos, either at the Kirikiri Maximum Custodial Center or the Ikoyi Medium Correctional Center, where he has been since his conviction. But Orji Uzor Kalu, a serving Senator, shall be serving his sentence at the Abuja Medium Custodial Center. The official reason for this prison transfer is because Kalu is standing trial in another case in Abuja. But beside this justification, Kalu would like to stay in Abuja so he would be closer to Abuja political power base. He remains a Senator and would like to participate as often as possible in senatorial proceedings. All it takes for him to attend senate proceedings is a production warrant signed by the Clerk of the Senate and served on the Officer in Charge of the prison facility. Even though two other former Governors are currently serving their prison terms in Kuje, keeping a man like Kalu in prison is quite a task for the prison authorities. So, extensive arrangements was made to move Kalu from Lagos to Abuja in a private jet, and the Kuje prison was actively preparing to receive him. Many Senators and top politicians were in Kuje on Sunday to visit with him. No doubt that his conviction has significantly dislodged him as a major political persona in Nigeria, but it is still too early to tell the extent.

This was what happened: in Oraifite, they have two masquerade groups - Otuafor and Otueke. Ejiofor became the leader of Otueke. The two groups clash now and then.  According to our sources, who are indigenes of Oraifite and familiar with the actors and the incidents, in  every quarrel between Otuafor and Otueke, Ejiofor would use some young men as his private army to intimidate and scare his opponents. Through the use of such young men, he became feared and influential in the community. Then there was one big fight between the two groups. Otueke group abducted some members of the Otuafor group. Then Otuafor filed a petition with the police. The peition named Ejiofor as the person they petitioned against. The police invited Ejiofor. Ejiofor did not show up at the appointed time and did not take calls from ACP Abbey. ACP Abbey led some policemen which included the head of SARS and another DPO and a few others to go and meet Ejiofor and bring him in for interview, especially as people were said to be have been abducted and held. As the police were on their way to Ejiofor’s house, boys believed to be Ejiofor's boys decided to waylay the police. They attacked the police, killing two and wounding many. They then burnt their bodies  in the police vehicle. Who are these boys? We don't know. However, the Government of Anambra State and the police believed they were the same IPOB boys that Ejiofor has  been using in the community. The police went back, reinforced and came back to the house of the leader of Otueke. According to our sources, when they got to Ejiofor's house, they met armed resistance from the boys guarding Ejiofor. They opened fire, killing some and torching the houses. Ejiofor who was at home when they arrived manage to flee and escape arrest. How did the IPOB become involved in this matter? The involvement of IPOB was by inference and deduction.. It was known or believed that the private army of bodyguards and intimidation force that Ejiofor has been using were IPOB members. That was not a secret.  It was known that the easy access to IPOB resources was Ejiofor's source of power and it was believed that the boys Ejiofor allegedly used to waylay the police and to resist them at his house and prevent his arrest were IPOB members The police have been raiding IPOB members' locations even outside Anambra State, including those men who were charged along with Kanu as casemates - Bright, Ben, and Chidiebere. For instance, they arrested Bright in Imo State and have kept him in an unknown locatuon. Ben heard they were coming and fled. The 3rd one is Chidiebere who is in Enugu. No news on whether they arrested him But it is strange that the police are going after known IPOB members who have nothing to do with what happened in Oraifite. That suggests a crackdown on IPOB members outside what happened in Oraifite. As things are, this remains a very serious case. The death of two senior police officers means that the case cannot be pushed aside easily. Even if Ejiofor is ultimately cleared of murder charges, he remains exposed to other charges. It will take a long time to resolve. As things are, the fate of Ejiofor who remains on the run and is believed to be hiding in the house of someone in Oraifite, lies in the hands of the Governor and Sir Emeka Ofor. Even at that it will require almost a miracle to rescue him. It remains uncertain how Ejiofor intends to end the run and surrender himself. The critical thing now is to make sure there will be no more shooting or more casualties. We need to know the identity of all those arrested, where they are detained and to ensure that their due process rights are preserved.

Since the day 13th Dec 2018, EJIOFOR appeared in court for David Aiyedogbon and the Nigerian Police in the murder and armed robbery charges against Emeka Ugwuonye as a nominal lawyer, I concluded that either Ejiofor  did not know that an innocent person could be charged falsely by the Nigerian Police or he was there simply for the 'pay' I'm not happy writing this because i don't want to appear as if i'm writing because Ejiofor  is in trouble. No!  What happened to my namesake; Ifeanyi Ejiofor or Emeka Ugwuonye can happen to any person in Nigeria. Nigeria is a country built on injustice and corruption. Nigerian Police can wake up one morning and rope you into a crime and from there, you struggle to save your life. Look at Emeka Ugwuonye,  the Nigerian Police felt threatened by Ugwuonye's constant criticism of their approaches to Charity Aiyedogbon’s disappearance/murder case and his efforts in exposing the atrocities in abattoir, the police turn round and rope him into a murder case he has been working on since 2016 as a human rights activist. I am not only surprised but worried that EJIOFOR could play the role he played. If we are fighting to have a country where Police will not rope innocent people into crimes then we should have good conscience. If EJIOFOR appeared for David Aiyedogbon and the Police and left, that would have been a different issue, but he went ahead to address the press and explained why the Police were right to have charged Emeka Ugwuonye with murder and armed robbery and explained why  Ugwuonye may have committed the crime since in his Facebook posts, he explained in detail how the murder was carried out. I was in tears after listening to EJIOFOR justified what even a novice could see as a clear case of impunity. The people fighting Ugwuonye celebrated EJIOFOR's appearance in court and circulated the interview granted by EJIOFOR widely, where he convicted Ugwuonye even before the case commenced. The women praised EJIOFOR and even hugged him in turns. Now look at it, the police accused him of being a kidnapper etc just to get at him and the matter escalated, people got killed. Should people continue to die in Nigeria because the police want to rope one person into crime? This is what we should all join hands together to fight. We should be careful what we support because karma has a way of bringing such things back to us. No doubt, there is too much power in the hands of the Nigerian police. Our effort is to make sure they don't use the power wrongly.  Allowing them to use the power carelessly is like allowing a drunk with a gun. Either he injure others or he injure himself or both. The reason we are in this decay is because we placed money and material gratifications above morality.   Ifeanyi Calistus Director of Information DPA

Since the day 13th Dec 2018, EJIOFOR appeared in court for David Aiyedogbon and the Nigerian Police in the murder and armed robbery charges against Emeka Ugwuonye as a nominal lawyer, I concluded that either Ejiofor  did not know that an innocent person could be charged falsely by the Nigerian Police or he was there simply for the 'pay' I'm not happy writing this because i don't want to appear as if i'm writing because Ejiofor  is in trouble. No!  What happened to my namesake; Ifeanyi Ejiofor or Emeka Ugwuonye can happen to any person in Nigeria. Nigeria is a country built on injustice and corruption. Nigerian Police can wake up one morning and rope you into a crime and from there, you struggle to save your life. Look at Emeka Ugwuonye,  the Nigerian Police felt threatened by Ugwuonye's constant criticism of their approaches to Charity Aiyedogbon’s disappearance/murder case and his efforts in exposing the atrocities in abattoir, the police turn round and rope him into a murder case he has been working on since 2016 as a human rights activist. I am not only surprised but worried that EJIOFOR could play the role he played. If we are fighting to have a country where Police will not rope innocent people into crimes then we should have good conscience. If EJIOFOR appeared for David Aiyedogbon and the Police and left, that would have been a different issue, but he went ahead to address the press and explained why the Police were right to have charged Emeka Ugwuonye with murder and armed robbery and explained why  Ugwuonye may have committed the crime since in his Facebook posts, he explained in detail how the murder was carried out. I was in tears after listening to EJIOFOR justified what even a novice could see as a clear case of impunity. The people fighting Ugwuonye celebrated EJIOFOR's appearance in court and circulated the interview granted by EJIOFOR widely, where he convicted Ugwuonye even before the case commenced. The women praised EJIOFOR and even hugged him in turns. Now look at it, the police accused him of being a kidnapper etc just to get at him and the matter escalated, people got killed. Should people continue to die in Nigeria because the police want to rope one person into crime? This is what we should all join hands together to fight. We should be careful what we support because karma has a way of bringing such things back to us. No doubt, there is too much power in the hands of the Nigerian police. Our effort is to make sure they don't use the power wrongly.  Allowing them to use the power carelessly is like allowing a drunk with a gun. Either he injure others or he injure himself or both. The reason we are in this decay is because we placed money and material gratifications above morality.   Ifeanyi Calistus Director of Information DPA

DPA Administration is deeply concerned upon reading in the press the declaration by the police that Mr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor, lawyer and member of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), is wanted in connection with murder, mayhem and other serious offences. Mr. Ejiofor, who is also representing Mr. David Aiyedegbon in relation to the disappearance death of Chacha, for which Mr. Aiyedegbon was suspected by this organization, has posted on the social media a video recorded statement made from his hideout. In his recorded statement, the obviously scared and agitated lawyer denied any involvement and professed his innocence as to the allegations the police have leveled against him. True to the discipline of our organization, we must presume Mr. Ejiofor innocent until proven otherwise. Beyond that, DPA demands that his due process rights be respected. Such rights include, but are not limited to, the right to know the nature of the evidence the police have against him and the opportunity to confront and controvert such evidence in a court of law. DPA has been on the receiving end of police abuse of power in Nigeria. It is noted that Mr. Ejiofor has self-confessed to being a friend and supporter of the Nigerian police. We defend his due process rights nonetheless. Even though he recently supported the police against DPA as gathered from his comments in the media, we derive no pleasure from his current predicament. In fact, in legal reasoning, there is something known as the doctrine of estoppel. When a person has been known to publicly hold a particular position, he is not allowed to suddenly change that position. Having held the view that the Nigerian police are to be trusted when they accuse others of serious crimes, Ejiofor should be estopped from suddenly turning around to suggest that the police are wrong when they accuse him of murder. But DPA shall refrain from holding Ejiofor to his cruel standards of justice. We shall instead remain committed to own standard of justice, equity and fairness, and apply that standard to Ejiofor. As we gathered from the video recording shared by Ejiofor, he seems to be on the run. We understand how dangerous and complicated his circumstances are right now. We therefore urge Commissioner of Police Abang to issue a public statement assuring the Nigerian public that Ejiofor will not be physically abused or maltreated if he surrenders himself to the police. And upon such assurance, we urge Ejiofor to turn himself in to the nearest police station. We fear that to continue on the run might create an excuse to harm him and to prevent the world from knowing the truth of what really happened. Before he turns himself in, though, we suggest he should hire an articulate lawyer who can better present his case intelligently to the public as well as defend his best interest in dealings with the authorities. His current practice of making video recordings of himself while on the run is an ill-advised and very distasteful tactic in dealing with an extremely combustible situation. Not only is he not in the right state of mind to argue his defenses, he lacks the full presence of the mind and he exposes all those who assist him now to serious legal jeopardy. Ejiofor may not quite understand it, given his limited exposure, but anyone that assists him or communicates with him as he runs or hides runs the risk of committing a crime. He may not be aware that the police can track, and must have been tracking, every call he makes now. Therefore, the best option is to turn himself in if he has not already done that. He should really consider what it is worth for him to expose more of his friends to legal risks. We further urge the police to resist the temptation to visit any prejudice and bias they may have against the Biafran project or IPOB on Ejiofor for wittingly and unwittingly holding himself out as the voice of that group. The allegations the police have leveled against him are exceptionally serious. Such allegations must never be leveled against a person except where the evidence is demonstrably clear and convincing, and capable of proof beyond all reasonable doubt. We end by extending our sympathies to the family of Ejiofor, particularly his wife and children. Every child suffers when such child is deprived of the presence of his or her parent. In this particular regard, we also extend our deepest sympathies and support to the families, particularly the children, of the police officers whose lives were cut short in this violent escalation, as well as to all others who lost their lives in this case. We call on all sides to eschew violence and seek peaceful means to resolve their differences. Resorting to violence never pays. May the souls of the departed rest in peace.   DPA Management

The Premium Times (PT), a Nigerian news site tries an old trick to rescue Sowore. The aim is to try to minimize the political damage Sowore may suffer due to his long detention despite court order. The way Premium Times seeks to achieve this is to spread false narrative or stories about how the President of Nigeria is trying to negotiate with Sowore. It is not impossible that the government may want to negotiate with Sowore. But when you look at the details of the story told by Premium Times, you will immediately understand that it doesn't make sense. Part of Premium Times story reads: "Rather than direct immediate compliance with a federal court order that freed Omoyele Sowore on bail, President Muhammadu Buhari has instead been sending emissaries to the activist to extract commitment from him to back down on the ‘revolution now’ protest as a precondition for his release. "In at least two attempts now confirmed by PREMIUM TIMES, the president’s emissaries visited Mr. Sowore where he is being illegally held at the State Security Service Headquarters to “negotiate for peace” in return for his freedom. "The Sahara Reporters’ publisher, however, rejected both attempts as extra-judicial and self-serving, saying he would not take part in any arrangement that would essentially lend legitimacy to unwarranted abuse of his fundamental rights and brazen disregard of judicial authority, people briefed on the matter told PREMIUM TIMES. "The development appeared the strongest indication yet that Mr. Buhari is aware of the continued detention of Mr. Sowore in defiance of multiple court orders. "Those who took part in the botched negotiation included Isa Funtua, a close political associate of the president; Sam Amuka, publisher of Vanguard Newspapers; Nduka Ogbaigbena, publisher of Thisday Newspapers and presidential spokespersons, Femi Adesina and Garba Shehu." The above story CANNOT be true. That is not how they operate, even when they need to do it. First, when PT says it confirmed the story, how did it confirm it? Nobody in such meeting, other than Sowore, will speak about such a meeting and place the mission in such poor light. And Sowore's account cannot be a confirmation because it will be self serving. Second, when in DSS custody, you (particularly Sowore) will not be allowed to speak with even his lawyer without DSS officers listening. And they would not allow such topic to be discussed. Third, Sowore is represented by a very vocal and influential lawyer, Falana. That such discussion was held and concluded without Sowore inviting his lawyer or requesting for him to be present is evidence that such discussion did not occur. Fourth, there is an extra effort to place the President in the alleged negotiation. Normally, any such effort will take the DSS director putting the terms to Sowore directly there and then for him to consider. There would be no need for the large delegation. Fifth, anybody familiar with Buhari's team knows that Adesina and Garba don't team up on any mission. So, involving both of them in the meeting and negotiation is unusual. Sixth, if ever such a meeting were to occur, the delegation will not admit that they were sent by the president. They will suggest that they came on their own to broker peace. To drop the name of the President in such a fashion is too amateur  and it risks causing the president to lose face should Sowore turn it down. The normal procedure would have been for these men to offer to help Sowore on certain conditions, even if they are working on the prompting of the President. Seventh, Sowore does not have much of a bargaining chip now. Nobody believes he is capable of causing any revolution now. Indeed, even if released, his bail conditions forbid him from trying such and if released, he will be closely monitored by the DSS. So, there cannot be any fear that he would lead a revolution if released. Eighth, if Sowore was secretly offered his freedom on the condition that he not lead a revolution, something he already knows he cannot do, he will be foolish to turn it down. So, that negotiation did not happen. Ninth, it is possible that the publisher of ThisDay and Vanguard went to see Sowore. They would do this in their own interest to earn the bragging right to claim one day that they played some role. And if those men claim to be representing the President, they are joking. Tenth, there is no doubt that the government blundered in the manner they handled Sowore's case. Indeed, they harmed Nigeria and shot themselves on the foot. But they did it on purpose because they don't care about the international community or any pressures. There is actually no pressure on Sowore's case when compared with the cases of Dasuki and El-Zakzaki. So, releasing Sowore will not be significant enough measure to improve Nigeria's human rights record. PT is peddling this rumor because it has been in alliance with Sahara Reporters to help each other. It is clear that Sowore's detention makes it harder for him to operate Sahara Reporters as he used to. And the site will suffer a steady decline. There is need to change the narrative and make it look as if freedom was offered to Sowore, but he refused on principle. Why then would Premium Times be spreading this?