The Source Magazine Online

...News from the depth, rooted in time

		Search Fo r
		Search Fo r

HOME

ARCHIVES

SUBSCRIPTION

ADVERT RATES

ABOUT US

FEBRUARY 26, 2007 VOL. 20. NO 20

Still, an Open Grave

**Nnaemeka**

Two months after the cold-blooded murder of an American-returnee, investigation into the killing go at a snail speed
By Eugenia Okpara, Owerri
THE Authorities of the 34 Artillery Brigade Obinze, near Owerri, Imo State has been accused of perverting justice in the case of alleged wilful murder of Nnaemeka Sylvester Obiekea, on December 24, 2006 as they have refused to release the suspects to the police for proper interrogation.
Ogbuagu Kenneth Obiekea, in a chat with The Source in Owerri, lamented that about a month after the soldiers were identified as active participants in the cold-blooded murder of his younger brother, the culprits are still let loose, simply because they are not civilians. It is also not very clear why the Nigerian Police appear very helpless in the circumstance.
Obiekea: “It is very unfortunate that those paid to protect Nigerian citizens have become not only professional killers themselves, but have also perverted justice in order to cover their ugly tracks. How can it be explained that nearly two months after some identifiable personnel of the Nigerian Army murdered a law-abiding citizen of the country in cold- blood, branding him an armed robber, the authorities of the 34 Artillery Brigade, Obinze, have refused, or are reluctant to release the suspects to the police for proper interrogation”.
The embittered family head alleged that the Brigade Commander of 34 Artillery Brigade, Obinze, Brigadier-General Amnon Kalayi Kwaskebe, was deliberately shielding the suspects because they killed a civilian who happens to be an Igbo man, insisting that the case would have been different if it was civilians that murdered a soldier serving in the Brigade, or any other military formation.
Reiterating that justice is being denied his late brother, Ogbuagu Obiekea said: “It is feared in many quarters that by not releasing the suspects, the Brigade Commander is trying to subvert the course of justice. The Police, I am told, have been deliberately prevented from conducting proper investigation in the murder case, as no proper interrogation has been done by the Investigating Police Office (IPO)”.
He revealed that the IPO could not interrogate the soldiers because they were usually escorted to Imo State Police Command Headquarters by army personnel who ensure they did not divulge more than the Brigade wants them to say.
His words: “What the Brigade has been doing is just to present the suspects to the police and take them back, without giving the IPO the opportunity to ask as many questions as they wished, especially those bordering on the murder case at hand. Even, the last time that the suspects were brought to the Command, which was on January 30, 2006, they did not wait for the IPO who, I was told, went to Orsu Local Government Area to investigate the clash between the people of Amaruru and police from Anambra”.
However, the family has applied for the interim police investigation report on the death of their son and brother, as well as the certified copy of the post-mortem examination report and the statements of the witnesses so far. While a competent source in the State Police Headquarters confirmed receipt of the letter, it was not, however, certian as at last week, if the police command will oblige.
Meanwhile, the Command’s Police Public Relations Officer (PPRO), Isah Bala Mohammed, a deputy superintendent of police (DSP), has lashed out at the Brigade concerning the insinuation that his men left their beat on the day of the incident. He reiterated that the dereliction of duty by his men, which is an offence, has no bearing with the murder case currently being investigated by the police.
Mohammed: “Let’s face it, our not being on the beat and the issue at hand— that is the murder case— what correlation do they have? The fact that we were not on that beat cannot justify the crime. The truth remains that I am not by this argument, attempting or trying to justify our men leaving beat. Appropriate action has been taken against them. We have already disciplined them for leaving beat. We have tried them for leaving beat, but does that exonerate the military men that were alleged to have shot this man, Nnaemeka, from the case? No, it does not.”
Mohammed insisted that his men leaving beat and the military shooting somebody are two different issues that should not be linked, adding that from the argument presented by the Brigade, two crimes are clearly manifest, leaving beat and murder which have no bearing at all.
His words: “So, our men leaving beat or not being there and the military shooting somebody are two different things. It is a case of leaving beat and murder, even though leaving beat is a grievous offence against discipline. But does not exonerate whoever that is found wanting in a case of murder? It does not. So, it has no co-relationship as far as I am concerned”.
Answering a question on whether police personnel were officially posted to the joint police/ army road block at Avu Junction on the fateful day, the PPRO confirmed that some policemen were actually posted to the beat, explaining that it was supposed to be joint patrol.
“Yes, of course, the place is supposed to be manned by a joint police and military patrol. If they are saying our men were not there, I do not have details, good and fine, we have taken appropriate action. Our men that were supposed to be there, we have already detained them for defaulting. We will soon commence their trial for leaving beat”, the PPRO disclosed.
On whether the command is in possession of the post-mortem report, Mohammed said that he does not know for now, except that the matter is being investigated, adding that he would not give any information that may jeopardise the course of investigation.
Regarding the likely time frame of the investigation, the Commands spokesman disclosed that the nature of a matter under investigation oftentimes determine when the investigation would be concluded.
He explained that investigators encounter the problem of gathering evidence and exhibits, as well as other materials needed for the investigation of a case, even if it is a rape matter.
His words: “Investigation can be concluded within the shortest possible time, or it can take longer time in the sense that it is not easy to gather all the evidence and exhibits to prosecute a matter like the one at hand. There are cases of murder, rape, robbery that take years to conclude. Investigation, even in the United States of America with all their sophistication, takes time to conclude. There are cases, if the case has a peculiar nature, cases are reported and all the evidence thereto is being adduced, you do not need to go the extra mile”.
Continuing, Mohammed said: “There are some that the circumstance is very dicey, controversial like this one. It is a very controversial case in the sense that this gentleman that was killed was alone, there was no eye-witness. Nobody can tell what really happened, that is why we are investigating. Be that as it may, I want to assure people that something positive must come out of the investigation”.
Regarding the reason behind the seeming reluctance of the military to release the suspects for interrogation, the PPRO explained that detention which is the legal prevention of someone’s liberty is detention, be it in a police or army cell.
Mohammed: “The fact of the matter is that detention is detention, be it in police cell or army cell. It is the legal prevention of one’s liberty. We detain people when they err, especially uniformed people in order to avoid escape. When somebody is being detained, he cannot escape any longer. These soldiers that are being suspected to have shot this man (Obiekea) report to the command on a daily basis under serious guard led by an officer”.