By our correspondent

The Department of State Services (DSS) on tuesday, october, 20, 2026, arraigned five suspects who allegedly kidnapped the 20 prospective National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) members along the Owerri-Onitsha road Imo state

According to the charge sheet, the three primary suspects, were Usman Aliyu, Babangida Aliyu, and Mohammed Alli

These prime suspects, however pleaded not guilty to the three-count charge of abduction and hostage-taking, collection of a N48 million ransom and dollars, and illegal possession of firearms.

The other two suspects, Aminu Haliru and Ibrahim Jiji, were charged with conspiracy and hostage-taking, as well as illegal possession of firearms.

The charge sheet also said that these suspects were accused of abducting Winner Ogidi, Opara Timothy, Ogechi Henrietta, and one other person on October 4, 2026. They also pleaded not guilty to the charges.

The prosecution counsel, Ekezie Nwauzo, filed a motion seeking to keep the suspects in DSS custody, which was granted by Hon. Justice Emeka Orafu, who presided over the court.

Nnaemeka Adipuo represented the first and second defendants in the corps members’ abduction case, while Paschal Ofoma appeared for the third defendant.

The cases were adjourned to Thursday, October 22, and Tuesday through Thursday, October 27–29, for hearing.

Recall that about 20 corps members were reportedly abducted on October 1 along the Owerri-Onitsha road while traveling to NYSC orientation camps in Akwa Ibom and Abia States. They were released after about six days in captivity and subsequently reunited with their families.

Speaking to journalists after the court session, defence counsel Nnamdi Adipuo and Paschal Ofoma noted that the suspects are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Show quoted text

By George Mgbeleke

The North Central Zonal Coordinator of Nigeria Mining Cadastral (NMC) Engr. Henry Temidayo Bolawale has said that the Mining Marshal of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), has been banned from enforcing and arresting Miners from any Mining site across the country by the Minister of Solid Mineral Mr Dele Alake stating that they still defied the ban.

Engr. Henry Bolawale made the disclosure while testifying before Justice Mohammed Mohammed nine member Commission of Inquiry when he appeared as a witness in the Commission.

He stated that in his position as the North Central State Co-ordinator of the Federal Mining Cadastral residing in the state, on his arrival in Niger state,he paid a courtesy visit to all security agencies in the state,including the Niger State Commandant of the NSCDC to solicit for their support toward sanitizing the activities of illegal miners in the state.

He alleged that the suspended Commandant,and the head of Mining Marshal in the Command,declined to give him the needed cooperation but” they carry out their operations without informing my office.

He also disclosed that during his arrival in the state he paid similar courtesy visit to the Commissioner of Mineral Resources in Niger State Mallam Mohammed Qasim Danjuma requesting for his Ministry support and cooperation on the need for sanitizing the mining sites in the state

Also,he alleged that the Commissioner of Mineral Resources in the State and the Mining Marshal of the NSCDC also carryout their operations to Mining Site arresting and confiscating gold and other minerals resource to themselves without giving account of the items seized from the miners.

“ The Commissioner arrested a Chinese National that has his licence to mine in the state. He seized all the minerals he mined to his personal confer.

“ I was called from the office of the Minister of Mineral resources in Abuja,over the arrest of the Chinese. I met the Commissioner to inform him that the arrest of the Chinese is illegal he refused to listen” he stated

Engr. Henry alleged that the Commissioner knowing fully well that his Ministry “ has no any business to arrest Miners without informing my office still partner with the already baned Mining Marshal to carry out their illegal operation across mining sites in M.I Wushishi and Lukoto mining site”

The North Central Zonal Coordinator of Federal Mining Cadastral told the Commission his office is a regulatory body of all mineral resources which he explained and the state Ministry is aware of our duty in the state “the Commissioner refused to recognize my responsibility describing the trend as disturbing.

He disclosed that despite the ban, the Mining Marshall of the NSCDC still went after the miners, arresting them and confiscating their gold and other minerals mined to themselves without making it available to the North
Central office.

According to the North Central Coordinator, his office has received a series of complaints on the operational activities of the NSCDC Mining Marshall in most of the Mining sites,” I told them that their operational activities on mining site is illegal because they have been baned”

He told the Commission further that the Minister of Mineral Resources Mr Dele Alake,has severally directed the Commandant General of NSCDC CG Ahmed Abubakar Audi to withdraw the operational activities of the Mining Marshal across the country, “but they still defied the directive,is only the National headquarters of the Corps that the Mining Marshal under the head of the Marshal ACG Onoja that Mining Marshal is allowed to operate”

By our correspondent

The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) has demanded an immediate explanation from the British Government for its failure to intervene in the persecution and prolonged detention of its citizen, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, in Nigeria.

The demand was contained in a statement by its media and publicity secretary, Emma Powerful on Monday evening.

The statement read in part, “UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) acknowledges that British nationals detained abroad may require intervention when internationally accepted standards are not met or when legal proceedings are subjected to unreasonable delay. Yet, faced with the grave violations in Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s case, Britain refuses to apply its own stated policy.”

It challenged the British Government: to explain how Nnamdi Kanu’s treatment meet internationally accepted standards of legality, due process and respect for fundamental human rights?

IPOB further reeled out five fundamental questions, saying
“EXTRAORDINARY Rendition: How does the illegal rendition of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu from Kenya to Nigeria in June 2021 meet internationally accepted standards, particularly when the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, in Opinion No. 25/2022, called for his immediate release?

“Defiance of the Court of Appeal’s judgement: How can his continued detention and the proceedings that followed be reconciled with the Court of Appeal’s judgment of 13 October 2022, which discharged him on specified counts?

“Conviction under Repealed Constitution: Can Britain reconcile his conviction of 20 November 2025 with section 36(12) of Nigeria’s Constitution, when the underlying terrorism legislation had been repealed? Prong 1 of the Supreme Court judgment made the existence of an extant and subsisting statute a condition precedent to continuation of the proceedings.That condition was not satisfied: the charge sheet did not disclose an offence known to extant or subsisting law. The Supreme Court judgment relied upon to justify continuation is under challenge as having been delivered per incuriam.

“Previously Quashed Counts: How can a conviction stand on a charge sheet that discloses no offence under extant law and includes counts previously discharged by the Court of Appeal, a superior court to the Federal High Court?

“Unreasonable Judicia Delay: How can Britain ignore the prolonged failure to hear Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s pending appeal while claiming to oppose unreasonable delay in legal proceedings?”

While noting that intervention is not interference, the group cited that
Diplomatic representations concerning due process, fundamental human rights and unreasonable judicial delay are legitimate instruments of consular and diplomatic engagement, not interference with judicial independence.

It stressed that Britain cannot hide behind “non-interference” while its own citizen faces grave violations of his rights.

IPOB noted that it is not asking Britain to dictate the outcome of a Nigerian court proceeding, but is rather demanding that Britain use its diplomatic leverage to press Nigeria to uphold legality, respect fundamental rights and ensure that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s pending appeal receives a prompt hearing.

The group further said, “If the British Government claims it cannot—or will not—uphold its policy to protect its citizen from state-sponsored persecution, the absolute bare minimum it must do is use its diplomatic leverage to compel Nigeria to list and hear Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s pending appeal, along with all associated suits across other tiers of court, without further delay.

“By refusing to demand even the basic scheduling of an appeal, Britain moves from passive indifference to active complicity.

“IPOB’S CORE DEMAND
DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE HEARING: Use diplomatic leverage to press Nigeria to list and hear Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s pending appeal and all associated suits across the relevant judicial tiers without further delay.

“Britain must now choose: translate its stated commitment to protecting its citizens into meaningful action, or expose that commitment as empty rhetoric when a British citizen of Biafran descent needs that protection most.”