The government of the United Kingdom (UK) has finally yielded to calls to designate the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) as a terrorist organization in the wake of the recent activities in the South East region, Njenje Media News reports.
This is coming after the gruesome beheading of an army couple who were on their way to Imo State by men suspected to be members of the Eastern Security Network (ESN), the army wing of IPOB.
The UK government after proscribing the group also said it has been excluded from its asylum program, but the brutal killing of the army couple was not among the listed atrocities of the Nnamdi Kanu-led group the UK government listed in its policy review document, as the action was taken a few days after the murder.
The acts of terrorism listed by the UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) Office against the ruthless murderous group (IPOB) include the invasion of an All Progressives Congress (APC) meeting in Enugu state where a party chieftain was killed; the attack on Imo Police formation where an officer was killed; killing of Anambra residents during enforcement of counter-productive”sit-at-home” order; killing of some policemen en route to Anambra International Airport, among others.
All the bizarre attacks occurred only in January 2022 alone. Recall that last year, UKVI had released new guidelines to its decision-makers on how to consider and grant asylum applications to IPOB.
Meanwhile, in a fresh update published on its website three days ago, UKVI has revised the policy.
“IPOB is proscribed as a terrorist group by the Nigerian government, and members of the group and its paramilitary wing – the Eastern Security Network (created in December 2020) – have reportedly committed human rights violations in Nigeria,” UKVI said in its policy notes.
“MASSOB has been banned but is not a proscribed terrorist group in Nigeria. It too has reportedly been involved in violent clashes with the authorities.
“If a person has been involved with IPOB (and/or an affiliated group), MASSOB or any other ‘Biafran’ group that incites or uses violence to achieve its aims, decision-makers must consider whether one (or more) of the exclusion clauses under the Refugee Convention is applicable.
“Persons who commit human rights violations must not be granted asylum.
The policy also directed that decision-makers must also check if there has been a previous application for a UK visa or another form of leave, noting that asylum applications matched to visas should be investigated before the asylum interview.
“The question is whether the particular person has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of their actual or imputed convention reason,” it added.
For an asylum application to succeed, it said the decision-makers must consider each case on its facts, taking into account the legal status, profile, size, and organization of the group/organization to which the person belongs and its activities; whether a person in the UK would wish to continue their activism if returned to Nigeria (if not, why not) and whether the group/organization has a presence in Nigeria as well as outside of the country and any evidence that it is being monitored by the government.
Other considerations include the person’s profile and political activities (including those online) and relevant documentary or other evidence; the profile and activities of family members; past treatment of the person, and evidence that their activities in the UK may have come to the attention of the Nigerian security agencies.
