This is exactly where IPOB leadership stand.
The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, was subjected to extraordinary rendition from Kenya to Nigeria in June 27th 2021, at Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi and forcibly transferred to Nigeria without a legal extradition process.
International law strongly prohibits “extraordinary rendition”, which involves the state-sponsored abduction and extrajudicial transfer of a person from one country to another, often for detention or interrogation outside legal frameworks, typically with a risk of torture or ill-treatment. Below is a concise overview of the key international legal principles and instruments that address and condemn extraordinary rendition, based on established legal frameworks and principles:
Key International Laws Against Extraordinary Rendition.
1. Prohibition of Torture and Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment: “UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT, 1984): – Article 3: States must not transfer (expel, return, or extradite) a person to another state where there are substantial grounds to believe they would face torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. Extraordinary rendition often violates this principle of “non-refoulement” by transferring individuals to states known for such practices.
2. Right to Liberty and Due Process: – **International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966)**: – **Article 9**: Protects against arbitrary arrest and detention, guaranteeing the right to liberty and security. Extraordinary rendition violates this by involving secret abductions and detentions without legal process.
3. Prohibition of Arbitrary Abduction: European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR): Article 5: Protects against unlawful detention. European states cooperating in extraordinary rendition have been condemned by the European Court of Human Rights for violating this provision.
4. International Humanitarian Law (IHL): Geneva Conventions (1949): – Particularly relevant in conflict settings, the Conventions prohibit unlawful transfers and inhumane treatment of detainees. Extraordinary rendition, especially when linked to armed conflicts (e.g., the “war on terror”), violates these protections.
Hague Regulations (1899/1907)**: Articles 42–56 prohibit unlawful actions in occupied territories, which may apply to renditions conducted in conflict zones.
5. State Responsibility and Accountability: – Extraordinary rendition engages state responsibility under international law for violations of human rights obligations. States that facilitate or cooperate in rendition programs (e.g., through airspace or hosting secret detention sites) are complicit in breaches of international law. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and other bodies have emphasized that states cannot evade responsibility by outsourcing human rights violations.
6. UN Charter and Sovereignty: -Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits violations of state sovereignty. Extraordinary rendition often involves abductions in foreign territories without consent, breaching this principle. – Unilateral actions like rendition undermine international cooperation and legal extradition processes.
Specific Violations and Consequences- **Illegality Under International Law**: Extraordinary rendition is illegal as it systematically bypasses legal extradition processes, violates state sovereignty, and facilitates torture or arbitrary detention.
as simple as that section 2 sub
section 3 F of terrorism
