Mixed reactions have trailed Friday’s ruling by a Federal High Court in Abuja supporting the Federal Government’s request to declare the Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN) a terrorist organisation.

The court made the declaration on Friday following an ex parte application filed by the Federal Government through the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF).

IMN members, better known as Shi’ites, have been involved in clashes with security agencies in recent times.

On Monday, Usman Umar, a senior police officer, and Precious Owolabi, a Channels Television reporter, lost their lives when the Shi’ites staged a protest in Abuja. The group also lost some of its members while many of them were arrested.

The IMN members have been asking the government to release Ibraheem el-Zakzaky, their leader, and Zeenatu, his wife, who have both been in custody since 2015.

They were arrested after Shi’ites and soldiers clashed in Zaria, Kaduna State in December 2015.

In reaction, the Pan Igbo sociocultural organisation, Ohanaeze Ndigbo declared that it amounted to double standards by the Federal Government to proscribe and subsequently designation IMN a terrorist organisation whereas Boko Haram and killer herdsmen, two deadly groups that have wrecked more havoc on Nigerians, are treated with kid gloves.

Speaking toSunday Telegraphin Enugu, Deputy National Publicity Secretary of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Mazi Chuks Ibegbu, said Ohanaeze was not against the proscription of IMN provided there was concrete and not contrived evidence of violence on their part.

He, however, noted that proscribing the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a non-violent group pursuing self-determination, and leaving Boko Haram and killer herdsmen was a double standard.

“If the Federal Government has evidence that the Shi’ites are a violent group, then they can consider proscription. But, however, there has to be concrete evidence that they are a violent group.

“It’s unlike IPOB that is not a violent group, it’s a self-determination group and they proscribed it unlawfully and unjustly. But even though they (Shi’ites) have been engaging government agents in frequent clashes, however, knowing the high handedness of our Nigerian forces over the years, nobody can be sure whether the mayhem was not caused by the government’s security machinery.

“But then again, the killer herdsmen and Boko Haram, we had expected that by now they should have been proscribed and declared terrorist organisations. By isolating those two groups and treating them with kid gloves, we are suspicious of this move,” he said.

Also commenting, the Secretary of Yoruba Council of Elders (YCE), Dr. Kunle Olajide, said: “Since I am not a legal mind and I have not seen the judgement, I heard it on the news but I didn’t feel comfortable with it. Because I felt that the Shi’ites to the best of my knowledge approached the court in respect of their leader and on one or two occasions and the court granted him bail.

“For me, I don’t see why you should describe such a group as a terrorist group; a group that had sought refuge in the court of law. In other words, they believe in constitutionalism. So, I don’t think it is right for anybody or any court to declare them a terrorist group.

“If they did not approached the court, then that would probably have been right. They approach the courts on many occasions and what they are doing is what I want to consider a legitimate protest unfortunately it turned bloody.

“I am sure they will react too. Their lawyers would go back to court because I would have expected that perhaps the judge that gave the judgement to find out what to happened to the court judgements that were disobeyed by the state.”

•Excerpted from a Sunday Telegraph report.