@Ifeoma Edum.. Many proofs of Genocide against Christians in Nigeria debunking APC government Stances

DVC – AdministrationA distinguished Academic who believes in leadership by example, Professor Amupitan joined the services of the University of Jos in 1989 as an Assistant Lecturer and rose through the Academic ranks to attain the position of Reader in 2003 and Professor in 2008. Professor Amupitan was conferred with the revered position of Senior Advocate of Nigeria SAN in 2014 in recognition of his achievements in the Law profession among many other professional accolades.EducationBSc. Law – University of JosMSc. Law – University of JosPhd. Law – University of JosThe new Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Administration), Professor Joash Amupitan is a Professor of Law with specialization and experience in Law of Evidence, Corporate Governance, Corporate Law and Privatization Law. He obtained his Bachelor of Law Degree in 1987 at University of Jos and then proceeded to the Nigerian Law School, Lagos where, on successful completion of his Barrister at Law programme, was Called to Bar in 1988. He later enrolled for a Master of Law programme in the University of Jos which he successfully completed in 1993. Professor Amupitan acquired his Ph.D in Law also from the University of Jos in 2003

INEC Chairman Prof Amupitan, who is the Newly appointed INEC Chairman, wrote Legal Brief In 2020 Report Confirming Genocidal Killings In Nigeria.

The document, signed under his law firm — “Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan (SAN) & Co. Legal Practitioners & Corporate Consultants”, bears the firm’s Jos and Abuja addresses, confirming his authorship long before his appointment by President Bola Tinubu.In the paper, Amupitan declared that “it is a notorious fact that there is perpetration of crimes under international law in Nigeria, particularly crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide.”He lamented what he described as the government’s failure to prosecute offenders and protect minority citizens, warning that Nigeria risked repeating “the Rwandan and Sudanese mistakes” where the world stood by as ethnic massacres unfolded.“While the country is trying to manage the concerns engendered by the clamour for self-determination,” he wrote, “two violent extremist groups have emerged to exacerbate an already deteriorating situation… Boko Haram and the Fulani herdsmen, responsible for an orgy of bloodbath and massive displacements in many States across Nigeria.”He noted that although Boko Haram had been formally designated a terrorist organisation in 2013, the Fulani herdsmen — whom he directly accused of orchestrating widespread massacres — had not been officially recognized as terrorists, but rather “labelled a terrorist group.”Amupitan’s legal analysis went beyond mere condemnation.

He accused the Nigerian government of constitutional failure, asserting that the neglect of the state to prosecute alleged perpetrators had made international intervention “a moral and legal necessity.”

“The victims of the crises are mainly the Christian population and the minority ethnic groups in Nigeria,” the brief stated, “and hence the need for remedial actions under the international law.”

He stressed that the “basis of intervention” was the government’s “neglect of its constitutional responsibility to provide welfare and security for the citizenry being the primary purpose of government.”

Tracing the historical roots of Nigeria’s ethno-religious conflicts, Amupitan wrote that the “drive for Islamisation of Nigeria through the jihad of 1804” had now reappeared through modern extremist movements. He described the Fulani-led jihad of Uthman Dan Fodio as a “full-blown Islamization agenda”, arguing that the same ideological undercurrent still drives much of the current violence in northern Nigeria.

“Following the 19th century jihad of Uthman Dan Fodio,” he explained, “the Hausa territories were conquered and the Sokoto Caliphate established… The success of the jihad was one of the religious triumphalism that aimed at expanding the caliphate to other parts of Nigeria in the irrevocable bid to dip the Quran into the Atlantic Ocean in Lagos.”

Amupitan linked that legacy to Nigeria’s modern-day insecurity, asserting that “the caliphate thereafter became a dominant force in the north,” and that subsequent governments had continued to protect its influence through political manipulation and systemic favoritism. The legal brief also accused Nigerian authorities of deliberately avoiding the term “genocide” to escape international accountability:

“States are skeptical of naming ‘genocide’ the way it is to avoid committing resources to stop it and to punish perpetrators,” he wrote. “Such States easily find cover under the principle of complementarity… Concealing genocide becomes a strategy to guard sovereignty and protect ego, at the expense of innocent lives.”

He added that “there is nothing as devastating as losing a group whose identity enjoys some specificity, uniqueness, and permanency that can neither be replaced nor easily replaceable.”

Prof. Amupitan concluded his paper by making a direct appeal to the United Nations and global powers to intervene in Nigeria’s crisis:

“The alleged involvement of the State and non-State actors in the commission of crimes under international law in Nigeria has complicated an already complex situation,” he wrote. “Consequently, the situation beckons the urgent need for a neutral and impartial third-party intervention, especially the UN and its key organs, the military and economic superpowers.”

He emphasised that international law supersedes absolute state sovereignty in cases of genocide and crimes against humanity, writing:

“In a globalised world, State sovereignty diminishes to accommodate the common interests of the global community concretised by a mixture of consent, consensus and compelling norms.”

All of these were said as contained in the SaharaReporters report by Amupitan, who is today Tinubu’s best man for the top job of INEC Chairman, thus already rubbing on the integrity of the 2027 elections he has been placed to conduct, considering the alleged claims in certain quarters that Tinubu, assisted by his pastor wife, has settled for a partnership with Christian community to have a re-election in 2027 and whittle the influence of majority Muslim votes spareheaded by Northern Nigeria, which brought him to power in 2023.A respondent, who refused to be named, said to our reporter in Abuja Thursday night that, “We have been complaining that Tinubu plays politics not governance. That is why he played himself into this internal mess that the name of Nigeria is dragged along. As far as I am concerned, revelation of the role of Amupitan in the religious tension Buhari government faced from is a divine design by God himself to expose the plot by the same people in whose hands Nigeria has been constitutionally placed but who are using the opportunity to turn the table, politically,v thinking that will help them in 2027.

“But that plan has backfired on them now. The question I ask myself is, why does Tinubu live to play politics with everything at the expense of good governance and you still see some Nigerians come out to sing his praises? Now for those of us who have erroneous blamed US President Donald Trump, we have now seen it is political collaboration Tinubu planned with using Christianity as force of relevance in his 2027 agenda that led the country to what Trump plans to do, though Trump errs for even accepting that only Christians are being killed.

This and many more exposures confirm that the systemic genocidal cleansing of Christians has been ongoing and bedded in Nigeria supported and funded by APC Government All those lingered under this CPC, status stand a very high chance of Visa Bans, property confiscation around the Globe . President Tinubu deserves,what he gets from Donald Trump and America.

Chief Ogbuji Anyaogu writes from Europe and requests privacy regarding his Country of Residence