BIAFRAEXIT: WHAT OBETTA SAYS ABOUT NNAMDI KANU WILL SHOCK YOU ,(MUST READ)

Mr Vincent Egechukwu Obetta made history late last year when he took up a brief to defend the leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB), Mr Nnamdi Kanu who was arrested and detained since October last year.
The legal practitioner, human rights activist and public affairs analyst who is also the director of StreetLaw Africa Inc, a human rights education non-governmental
organization, was able to obtain a court order in December for the release on bail of the Radio Biafra director, Kanu, which court order has not been obeyed till date.
Obetta was, however, dropped by the IPOB in the defence of Kanu after he had assembled some seasoned lawyers for the task ahead.
In this interview, Obetta bared his mind on the purported negotiation on behalf of the IPOB leader by the lawyers who took over from him and MEND, saying that negotiation would do the detained IPOB leader more good than harm. He praised the former Abia governor, Dr. Orji Uzor Kalu for his efforts when he contacted him to help use his connections to facilitate freedom for Kanu, saying that they were almost making a breakthrough when he disengaged from the defence of the IPOB leader. He also disclosed the efforts made by other prominent Nigerians in the negotiation to free Kanu.
Two days ago, IPOB again changed lawyers for their detained leader Nnamdi Kanu; you started his defence in court, why is the group always changing its counsel?
I do not think I am in the position to pontificate as to the reason(s) IPOB changes its lawyers. In a lawyer and client relationship, the client enjoys the privilege, in terms of how he manages his case. He can hire and fire at will. But on the other hand, a good client should be resilient and tread cautiously in the way and manner he exercises that right. To avoid abuses, firing a lawyer should be in extreme case, particularly where the fiduciary relationship existing between them no longer exists. In this instance, I learnt that members of the legal team went beyond the briefs that were given to them when they invited the Federal Government to the negotiation table, as well as cutting the ties between their clients with the members of the Niger Delta Avengers. In the same statement, all manner of allegations were levelled against the lawyers. So, once that conflict of confidence creeps in, I think, the lawyer(s) should throw in the towel. Legal representation is rooted in trust and confidence.
Also, we saw IPOB disowning the claimed negotiation with the Federal Government, including that of MEND for the release of Mr Nnamdi Kanu, how do you see that action?
I will say that it is not possible to shave a man’s hair in his absence. To me, the MEND may have been spurred into this by a genuine and bonafide desire to foster peace within the South-South and South-East regions. There is a missing link in- between. I think there was a discussion that took place, somewhere. Let us wait to hear from the MEND. I am optimistic they will rejoin it soon.
You said you also tried to use the negotiation option when you were IPOB counsel, how and what efforts did you make in that direction?
The principle of self-determination in international law is nebulous and ambiguous, depending on one’s point of view; as for me, the principle belongs to the province of law as of politics and it will serve me no purpose to set law up against politics, or politics against law. It is against this backdrop that I initiated the process of negotiation on behalf of Nnamdi Kanu, notwithstanding the fact that I had a robust outing in the court then – but that was the law aspect of it. The political aspect is also necessary considering our clime where those who ought to be custodians of our laws often observed it in breach. These two indispensable factors guided me. In selecting my legal team, I opted for a hy