The green light given Friday by Nigeria’s Supreme Court for the prosecution of the leader of the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), Chief Ralph Uwazuruike, and six others for alleged treason has been described as a declaration of war against their ethnic group, the Igbo.

“I wonder the circumstances under which Uwazuruike and his MASSOB colleagues should be tried for treason. MASSOB is a non-violent organisation that has not at any time taken up arms against the Federal Government like the other groups such as Boko Haram and the Niger Delta militants had done,” said an angry Emeka Umeagbalasi, Chairman of International Society for Civil Liberties and the Rule of Law (Intersociety).

“Despite taking up arms against government and killing people and destroying the economy of the country, these groups have not been made to face any trial,” he added.

According to Umeagbalasi, “The decision to try Uwazurike and members of his group shows the inequality that exists in Nigeria and we condemn the court pronouncement on this matter because it is an extension of war against the Igbo using judicial mechanism.

“Igbos have been suffering economic, social and political marginalisation, but they still want to go further to provoke them. This ruling should be condemned because this kind of ruling does not encourage peace in the country.”

Similar reactions have trailed the judgement from the Igbo nation.

News Expess reports that a five-man panel of justices of the Nigerian apex court led by Justice Mahmud Mohammed, had dismissed an appeal lodged by Uwazuruike and five other accused MASSOB members, telling the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Mohammed Adoke Bello, (SAN), that their “trial should proceed with dispatch.”

The other accused persons affected by the judgement are Ambrose Anyaso, Augustine Ihuoma, Chibuike Nwosu, Kelechi Ubabuike, Chimankpa Okorocha and Benedict Alakwem.

The Nigerian Government had on November 8, 2005, arraigned the six non-violent separatist campaigners before the Federal High Court Abuja on a four-count criminal charge bothering on treasonable felony.

It alleged that the accused top officials of MASSOB on diverse dates between January 2004 and October 2005, at Owerri (capital of Imo State) and other places in Nigeria, acted “with intent to levy war, overawe and overthrow the legitimate government of Nigeria,” conspired to commit felony to wit: treason against the Federal Republic of Nigeria, contrary to Sections 37 (2), 62(2) (1) 64, 237 (1) of the Criminal Code Act Chapter 77, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990 and punishable under Sections 37 and 63 of the same Act.”

They were additionally accused of belonging to a militant group called MASSOB Army and undergoing training with the intent to levy war in order to overthrow the President and government, as well as, formed, managed and assisted in the management of an unlawful society of more than 10 persons whose aim was to incite acts of violence and disturb peace and order in the country.

All accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge and urged the trial court to quash it for being incompetent and baseless, contending that there was no proof of evidence indicting them to the commission of any crime known to law.

Their counsel, the radical Lagos lawyer Festus Keyamo, challenged their arraignment despite a subsisting order of the Federal High Court, Owerri, made on January 18, 2005, which restrained the Federal Government from infringing upon their fundamental human rights.

After the trial judge, Justice Binta Nyako, refused to either quash the charge or release the accused persons on bail, Keyamo headed for the Appeal Court Abuja, which on May 15, 2008, granted thembail but refused to dismiss the charge.

That made the accused persons to take their case to the Supreme Court.

Ruling on the matter on Friday, Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour, who delivered the lead judgement, said: “This appeal to my mind is unnecessary and clearly a waste of precious judicial time since all the information imaginable that the appellants’ would need fortheir defence has been available to them before they appealed to the Court of Appeal.

“Courts are set up with the sole purpose to do substantial justice between the parties… The argument that the charge should be dismissed because it was not accompanied by proof of evidence is a mere technicality designed to defeat the course of justice.

“In the light of the fact that the proof of evidence has been filed and is available to the appellants, trial should proceed with dispatch. This appeal is dismissed.”

Other members of the panel who concurred with the lead verdict were Justices John Afolabi Fabiyi, Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili and Kumai Bayang Akaahs.

Uwazuruike and his co-accused were yet to react to the judgement as at the time of this report but many commentators have dismissed it as foolish, unjustifiable and capable of encouraging violent struggles rather than the non-violent strategy adopted by MASSOB since its formation in late 1999.

•Photo shows MASSOB Leader Uwazuruike.