NothingDoMe:
You are smarter than this.

If going home would grant biafra my people would have left even before the ultimatum.

We both know that this path will lead to war and not Biafra. Let the rep member from the north supporting this action also ask for a referendum.

The reps from the North cannot ask for a referendum on your behalf. They are not the ones that want to form a new republic. So stop asking others to do your dirty work for you.

When Scotland sought a referendum, it was a Scottish MP Nicola Ferguson Sturgeon who is the current First Minister of Scotland and the leader of the Scottish National Party, in office since 2014, that pushed the request for a referendum through the Parliament. It was not a British or a Welsh politician.

You chaps have over 15 senators from the SE. Ask them to move a motion requesting for a referendum on Biafra, in the red chamber.

NothingDoMe:
Yoruba always dragging seniority even with anonymous monikers. Hahahaha.

My point is, is it now official? Does going back grant it officially?. The igbo reps have asked for referendum.

Are you guys ready cooperate?

Simple question you start to drag age. Lmao.

Where, when and how did the Igbo reps ask for referendum? On the pages of newspapers?

12Monkeys:


Don't be daft.

The court would have thrown the suit out immediately if it did not have jurisdiction

The ruling the Biafran American citizens are hoping to get is to establish that Buruntai is a war criminal and from there other sanctions can follow


FYI, the US Foreign office has war criminals listed as one of many criminals that are barred from visiting th US


The suit is to make a US Federal court to declare Buruntai as a war criminal first and foremost. The financial compensation is secondary and of no relevance to those who sued Buruntai

LOL i swear IPOB are some funny set of people, So court will throw out case that have nit being heard at all? hahaha

Well it was the lawyer of the respondents that will push it to the court that it lack the jurisdiction to sanction of hear their case haha.

12Monkeys:
Don't be daft.

The court would have thrown the suit out immediately if it did not have jurisdiction

The ruling the Biafran American citizens are hoping to get is to establish that Buruntai is a war criminal and from there other sanctions can follow

FYI, the US Foreign office has war criminals listed as one of many criminals that are barred from visiting th US

The suit is to make a US Federal court to declare Buruntai as a war criminal first and foremost. The financial compensation is secondary and of no relevance to those who sued Buruntai

For someone to be declared a war criminal, a war must first have taken place. Which war did Buratai wage against the so-called Biafrans? Was he a combatant in the civil war that took place in 1967-1970?

Hizzy:

ee go Do u vam lik nepa light 4 ur eyes

Same way that of Trump and Netanyahu do vam for my eyes like Nepa light? haha..


Well You have been asked to go what are you still waiting for? pack your load and relocate back to your country now..

I don't understand this. The Nigerian case was taken to an American court for hearing and delivering justice? How does that work exactly?

excanny:
The Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 (TVPA; Pub.L. 102–256 , H.R. 2092 , 106 Stat. 73 , enacted March 12, 1992) is a statute that allows for the filing of civil suits in the United States against individuals who, acting in an official capacity for any foreign nation, committed torture and/or extrajudicial killing . The statute requires a plaintiff to show exhaustion of local remedies in the location of the crime, to the extent that such remedies are "adequate and available." Plaintiffs may be U.S. citizens or non-U.S. citizens.

Although the Act was not passed until early 1992, it was introduced the previous year, and the official name of the Act is the "Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991."

Legal issues
In 1992, Sister Dianna Ortiz was the first to file a case under the act, in a civil action against former general and Defense Minister Héctor Gramajo of Guatemala , contending that, by his command authority, he was responsible for her abduction, rape, and torture by military forces in Guatemala in November 1989. A federal court in Massachusetts ruled in her favor, awarding her $5 million in damages in 1995.

Have those who filed a case against Buratai in the US under this Act tried to get relief in the local Nigerian courts? Have they proved beyond reasonable doubt that they have exhausted local remedies in the location of the crime, to the extent that such remedies are "adequate and available?"

abbey621:
I'll just show you 3 things wrong here:

1. Civil Case: What Biafrans want is not monetary compensation but criminal prosecution.

2. Extrajudicial killing - Biafrans would have to argue that the protesters were not armed and the use of force was not sanctioned by the present rule of law in Nigeria.

3. They now have to show that they have exhausted all local remedies which means they have tried the judicial system in Nigeria, there are written documentation of nonchalant response from the justice system and so on.

There's a reason why this particular act has never been applied to a democratic government, the burden of proof is exhausting!

Exactly!! May God continue to increase the wisdom He has placed in your life.

Okpabana:
Nigeria matter in American court? Nawao some people mumu sha. American courts now has power and jurisdiction to handle Naija internal issues. I tire for these biafrauds oo.

Educate urself small

Alien Tort Statute

The Alien Tort Statute (28 U.S.C. § 1350; ATS), also called the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), is a section of the United States Code that reads: "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." Since 1980, courts have interpreted this statute to allow foreign citizens to seek remedies in U.S. courts for human-rights violations for conduct committed outside the United States.

Guess you were not in Nigeria when AI released its report?

Guess you were in the moon when the army decided to play the ostrich in denial?

Guess you are not in Nogeria to know that up till now no single soldier has been sanctioned for the crimes against humanity that was committed against IPOB despite the darnming evidences?

Guess you were in slumber when rogues were paid to protest and deman for the expulsion of AI?

laudate:


Have those who filed a case against Buratai in the US under this Act tried to get relief in the local Nigerian courts? Have they proved beyond reasonable doubt that they have exhausted local remedies in the location of the crime, to the extent that such remedies are "adequate and available?"



Exactly!! May God continue to increase the wisdom He has placed in your life.

abbey621:
Are you retarded or did your mother drop you while you were a baby? Read what you posted, does it mention criminal prosecution? NO! Where the defendants diresctly harmed by Burutai or his men? NO! The ATCA "allows Americans and foreigners to file suit for violations of international law while the defendant is in the United States.Why not stop relying on wikipedia and do some research yourself, you are obviously not strong in the intelligence spectrum so I'll repeat myself, U.S district courts have no jurisdiction in this matter, the case is beyond their authority and the act that you claim does not hold water in a democratic government. I could understand if the 10 Biafrans were direct victims and have exhausted all local efforts for compensation but to go direct to a U.S district court is foolish especially when we have international bodies capable of much harsher judgments...Stop your foolishness and educate yourself!

Guy, don't bother yourself educating these people. They have refused to learn. Let us wait until the court carries out its judgement, and they would see that filing that case was just a needless waste of time. As for the international scrutiny that the case would attract, they should not forget that the Nigerian govt has deep pockets and adequate funds to hire the best American lobbyists, PR firms etc., to do damage control, unlike IPOB. The noise will die down after a short while...

KratosCorp:
Guess you were not in Nigeria when AI released its report?

Guess you were in the moon when the army decided to play the ostrich in denial?

Guess you are not in Nogeria to know that up till now no single soldier has been sanctioned for the crimes against humanity that was committed against IPOB despite the darnming evidences?

Guess you were in slumber when rogues were paid to protest and deman for the expulsion of AI?

Amnesty International is NOT a court that has jurisdiction over civil or criminal matters. Neither can it pass sentences on crimes or detain offenders.

You did NOT answer my question, neither did you provide any relevant info. The question still remains: Have those who filed a case against Buratai in the US under this Act tried to get relief in the local Nigerian courts? Have they proved beyond reasonable doubt that they have exhausted local remedies in the location of the crime, to the extent that such remedies are "adequate and available?" Simple question.

abbey621:
Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum[edit] ¬ Main article: Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum

The plaintiffs in Kiobel were citizens of Nigeria who claimed that Dutch, British, and Nigerian oil-exploration corporations aided and abetted the Nigerian government during the 1990s in committing violations of customary international law.[30] The plaintiffs claimed that Royal Dutch Shell compelled its Nigerian subsidiary, in cooperation with the Nigerian government, to brutally crush peaceful resistance to aggressive oil development in the Ogoni Niger River Delta.[31] Plaintiffs sought damages under the ATS. The defendants moved to dismiss based on a two-pronged argument. First, they argued that customary international law itself provides the rules by which to decide whether conduct violates the law of nations where non-state actors are alleged to have committed the wrong in question.

Second, they contended that no norm has ever existed between nations that imposes liability upon corporate actors. On September 29, 2006, the district court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims for aiding and abetting property destruction; forced exile; extrajudicial killing; and violation of the rights to life, liberty, security, and association. It reasoned that customary international law did not define those violations with sufficient particularity. The court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss with respect to the remaining claims of aiding and abetting arbitrary arrest and detention; crimes against humanity; and torture or cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment. The district court then certified its entire order for interlocutory appeal to the Second Circuit based on the serious nature of the questions at issue.

In a 2–1 decision issued on September 17, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that corporations cannot be held liable for violations of customary international law, finding that: (1) under both U.S. Supreme Court and Second Circuit precedents over the previous 30 years that address ATS suits alleging violations of customary international law, the scope of liability is determined by customary international law itself; (2) under Supreme Court precedent, the ATS requires courts to apply norms of international law—and not domestic law—to the scope of defendants' liabilities. Such norms must be "specific, universal and obligatory"; and (3) under international law, "corporate liability is not a discernible—much less a universally recognized—norm of customary international law",[30][32] that the court could apply to the ATS, and that the plaintiffs' ATS claims should indeed be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Kiobel petitioned the Supreme Court for review of the Second Circuit's decision, and this was granted on October 17, 2011. Oral arguments were held on February 28, 2012,[33][34] The arguments received considerable attention in the legal community.[35][36] Unexpectedly, the Supreme Court announced on March 5, 2012, that it would hold additional argument on the case during the October 2012 term, and directed the parties to file new briefs on the question "Whether and under what circumstances the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, allows courts to recognize a cause of action for violations of the law of nations occurring within the territory of a sovereign other than the United States."[37] Reargument of the case occurred on October 1, 2012.

On April 17, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court held that the ATS does not apply outside the United States.[38]

For those looking for precedence, in summary even the Supreme Court has a hard time indicting a democratic government official!

End of story!

Go to US and strike away the suit if you're angry.

laudate:


Amnesty International is NOT a court that has jurisdiction over civil or criminal matters. Neither can it pass sentences on crimes or detain offenders.

You did NOT answer my question, neither did you provide any relevant info. The question still remains: Have those who filed a case against Buratai in the US under this Act tried to get relief in the local Nigerian courts? Have they proved beyond reasonable doubt that they have exhausted local remedies in the location of the crime, to the extent that such remedies are "adequate and available?" Simple question.

KratosCorp:
Go to US and strike away the suit if you're angry.

Wetin concern me? Was I the one that filed the suit? Or am I the one trying to trap Buratai? Advise your people not to waste their time, and explore other options of getting what they want.

laudate:


Have those who filed a case against Buratai in the US under this Act tried to get relief in the local Nigerian courts? Have they proved beyond reasonable doubt that they have exhausted local remedies in the location of the crime, to the extent that such remedies are "adequate and available?"



Exactly!! May God continue to increase the wisdom He has placed in your life.

If the judge didn't throw out their suit, it means they did all necessary prerequisites.

excanny:
If the judge didn't throw out their suit, it means they did all necessary prerequisites.

Wait for the court's judgement, first.

Since nothing concerns you, just shut the bleep up and realize that it's not your time that's getting wasted. Plus be on notice that ALL options are getting explored in.order to get what they want. So, just keep your unsolicited wisdom and knowledge to yourself or use it to get what you and your family want instead of wasting them on issues that do not concern you and on which your advice or input is neither needed nor solicited.

laudate:


Wetin concern me? Was I the one that filed the suit? Or am I the one trying to trap Buratai? Advise your people not to waste their time, and explore other options of getting what they want.

KratosCorp:
Since nothing concerns you, just shut the bleep up and realize that it's not your time that's getting wasted. Plus be on notice that ALL options are getting explored in.order to get what we want. So, just keep your unsolicited wisdom and knowledge to yourself or use it to get what you and your family want instead of wasting them on issues that do not concern you and on which your advice or input is neither needed nor solicited.

Why am I not surprised by your response? When folks like you have nothing intelligent to say, they resort to insults. FYI, I can make any comment I like, on any topic. It was NOT written anywhere, that I had to take permission from you or your deluded members to do so. Now swerve, and get off my mentions for good!

Okay, it's an insult to tell you to shut up and mind your business, but it's not an insult for you to tell others how to run their lives? Alright you have not seen insults yet. Just keep poking your nose where it's not needed.

laudate:


Why am I not surprised by your response? When folks like you have nothing intelligent to say, they resort to insults. FYI, I can make any comment I like, on any topic. It was NOT written anywhere, that I had to take permission from you or your deluded members to do so. Now swerve, and get off my mentions for good!

KratosCorp:
Okay, it's an insult to tell you to shut up and mind your business, but it's not an insult for you to tell others how to run their lives? Alright you have not seen insults yet. Just keep poking your nose where it's not needed.

Poking what nose? An issue for discussion is posted on a public forum, and you have the nerve to ask people not to comment on it? By the way, just how old are you?

Candyrain:


Educate urself small

Alien Tort Statute

The Alien Tort Statute (28 U.S.C. § 1350; ATS), also called the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), is a section of the United States Code that reads: "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." Since 1980, courts have interpreted this statute to allow foreign citizens to seek remedies in U.S. courts for human-rights violations for conduct committed outside the United States.

This law is good.Biafrans should make good use of this law.After Burutai d next should be An go Abdullahi and others who r threatening wars if Biafrans secedes.Their statements should be recorded for prosecution One thing I'm sure of is that Biafra as a nation will work with d Jewish nation,Europe and USA to bring some African leaders to book.

Much older than you definitely.

laudate:


Poking what nose? An issue for discussion is posted on a public forum, and you have the nerve to ask people not to comment on it? By the way, just how old are you?

KratosCorp:
Much older than you definitely.

Impossible, judging by the immature responses flowing from your keyboard...

laudate:


Guy, don't bother yourself educating these people. They have refused to learn. Let us wait until the court carries out its judgement, and they would see that filing that case was just a needless waste of time. As for the international scrutiny that the case would attract, they should not forget that the Nigerian govt has deep pockets and adequate funds to hire the best American lobbyists, PR firms etc., to do damage control, unlike IPOB. The noise will die down after a short while...

Imagine how you reason.Let him step into America and see.By d time PMB second term is put on d condition he retires him that s when u will know how far.

The only mature thing in your perspective is agreeing with your crappy one Nigeria rants.

laudate:


Impossible, judging by the immature responses flowing from your keyboard...

amaechi2020:
A United States (U.S.) District Court for the District of Columbia has granted leave to 10 Biafran plaintiffs to sue Nigeria’s Chief of Army Staff, Gen. Tukur Yusuf Buratai, and 13 others for complicity in the 2016 torture and extra-judicial killings under colour of Nigeria law to retaliate for peaceful Biafran protests against ethnic or religious oppression.

Brought under the Torture Victims Protection Act and Alien Tort Claims Act Complaint, the plaintiffs are seeking millions of dollars as damages to compensate for their grievous losses and suffering.

The suit, John Doe, et al vs. Tukur Yusuf Buratai et al, with Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-01033, has been assigned to United States District Judge Ellen S. Huvelle, who was appointed by President William Jefferson Clinton.
The court further ruled that the “plaintiffs alleged that identifying plaintiffs or decedents would expose them, their families and relatives to an intolerable risk of death or serious bodily injury at the hands of defendants or the Government of Nigeria.”

Counsel to the plaintiffs, Attorney Bruce Fein of Fein & DelValle PLLC, and W. Bruce DelValle, said, among others: “This landmark lawsuit is about justice and the rule of law coming to rescue Igbo, Biafrans and their political supporters who are persecuted, because of their Christian religion, ethnicity and political viewpoints since Nigeria’s independence from its colonial master Great Britain in October 1960.”

http://guardian.ng/news/buratai-13-others-taken-to-u-s-district-court-over-biafra-protests/

we pray they jail buratia

KratosCorp:
The only mature thing in your perspective is agreeing with your crappy one Nigeria rants.

_(yawn)...Continue throwing tantrums.

DanseMacabre:
But I don't understand. Will he be repatriated to face trial, or will the trial be in absentia?

And if he's found guilty, will he be repatriated to serve punishment, or will it be here in Nigeria?

I am not a Lawyer but this is a civil case on behalf of victims of Nigerian Army brutality. It's not a criminal case. So, no, they will not be extradited or declared wanted. But if Nigeria does not present a defense, then the court will rule against them and they will be liable to pay whatever fine the court sets.
However, if it is found that they committed crime against humanity, they can be prosecuted at the ICC at the Hague. In that case it'll be a criminal case and they would be extradited and if found guilty, will be jailed (to join Charles Taylor).

ivolt:
I trust Trump to put Americans first.

The US judiciary is not controlled by the president. Trump will not have any input here.

decomaniaboss:
perhaps Jews are Muslims or Buddhists to u

Are they Christians?

auntysimbiat:
US can't tel us how we will operate, stop wasting ur tym

Says who? They told Manuel Noriega of Panama, Sadam Hussein, Gaddafi just to name a few. And there's the UN too, via the ICC which jailed Charles Taylor.
So, yes, the US (and the UN) can tell us how to operate.

DrObum:
Does that court have jurisdiction here


Take the man to ICC or quit making sport of yourselves nah

Yes it does. Some powerful countries have laws that allow them to prosecute for crimes committed outside their country.