Chapter 10
Extent of Loss of Life
The ascertainment of this was a herculean and probably impossible task.
The Nigerian authorities had made no effort to issue any figures which would inspire any confidence in their accuracy. They had rather engaged themselves in denying estimates of the dead given by other sources, often without any attempt to substitute what they considered to be accurate figures. Thus the figures of 526 dead in Kano during the May disturbances was said to have appeared in the local evening edition of New Nigeria of 2nd June, 1966 by the 172nd witness E. Akrasi. Officialdom denied this on 3rd June, 1966 without substituting any figures of theirs. What is worse is that it was the official policy deliberately to falsify figures before rendering returns. According to Mr. I. B. Udumaga, an Inspector of Police then stationed in Kaduna (witness No. 166), the figure for the dead coming from various places in Northern Nigerian were so alarmingly high that the police in all the Northern provinces were asked to adopt new procedure in order to scale down these figures. They were no longer to send their daily situation reports direct to Lagos as had always been the practice. Returns were to be sent by code to Kaduna, where what was to be given to Lagos would be “processed”.
It is, therefore, evident that the Nigeria Police would never give reliable information about the extent of loss of life. Another source of information for the figures of those who died during the disturbances which was considered might yield fruitful returns was an actual count in the various towns and villages in Eastern Nigeria. Consequently the following letter was sent out to all local council areas on 8th February, 1967.
8th February, 1967
The Chairman/Secretary
…………………..Local Council
………………………………………
………………………………….Division.
Sir,
The Chairman of the Tribunal of Inquiry (Atrocities) has directed me to write you this letter to seek your assistance in obtaining from the villages in your council areas details of loss of life and injuries sustained by persons in your area as a result of disturbances in Nigeria during 1966.
In order to enable you compile the information accurately I am sending you form ATR. 5 which should be completed and returned to me before the 18th of February.
No doubt you will avail yourself of the services of the Refugees Association, if any, in your council area.
Yours faithfully,
Sgd. (P.C. Chigbo)
Secretary
Each letter was accompanied by the following form to be completed for the returns:
Tribunal of Inquiry (Atrocities)
(Returns by Local Councils)
ATR.5
Local Council………………… Division……………………..Provision
| Questionnaire Men | Men | Women | Children (below 18 years) | Total |
| A. Number of persons known to have died,
i) In Northern Nigeria: ii) In Western Nigeria: iii) In Lagos.
B. Number of persons seriously wounded, i) In Northern Nigeria ii) In Western Nigeria: iii) In Lagos:
C. Number of persons missing and presumed dead in Northern Nigeria:
D. Total number of refugees in council area:
E. Total Number of persons of the area still living in Northern Nigeria: |
Distribution was to 842 local councils but returns have so far come from only 723 councils.
The forms which were classified into
- Number of persons dead;
- Number of persons wounded;
- Number of persons missing;
- Number still in the North;
- Total number of refugees;
was meant to cross-check itself for accuracy bearing in mind that a total of about two million (2,000,000) refugees are estimated to have returned to Eastern Nigeria.
With returns from about two-thirds of the total number of local councils the following pattern emerged:
| (1) | Total number dead | 6,088 |
| (2) | Total number missing | 4.680 |
| (3) | Number wounded | 4,575 |
| (4) | Number still in the North | 3,792 |
| (5) | Total number of refugees | 336,241 |
Apart from the fact that the returns were not complete, there were obvious inaccuracies in some of the returns. Thus while Nnewi is generally known to have had more people resident in Northern Nigeria than most other places in the East, the following comparative figures in the returns are revealing of the amount of reliance to be placed on them:
| Division
|
Dead | Wounded | Missing | Still in North | Refugees |
| Nnewi | 93 | 23 | 29 | 50 | 5,429 |
| Ishielu
|
1,783 | 932 | 879 | 1033 | 28,494 |
| Mbaise
|
298
|
282 | 193 | 88 | 17,727 |
| Ngwa | 235 | 351 | 195
|
153 | 5,145 |
It was clear that many places did not give complete and accurate returns. We were to learn that the secretaries of the Local Council on whom the burden of collection depended were not only grossly inexperienced in this type of survey work but had not even the staff for the exercise. Consequently the field staff of the Economic Planning Commission of the Republic of Biafra was, at the request of the Tribunal, sent into villages to do sample survey of the number of the Eastern Nigerians killed and those who returned from Northern Nigeria from May 1966 to December 1967. Their findings showed conclusively that the returns sent in response to the questionnaire to Local Councils were so incomplete as to warrant outright injection. Thus while the secretary’s returns for Mbaise group of Local Councils were 298 persons killed and 17,727 returnees the Held staff of the Economic Planning Commission returned 657 dead and 31,957 returns. For Nnewi Division the secretaries of the Local Councils returned 93 killed and 5,429 returnees as against 2,300 killed and 90,460 returnees by the trained field staff doing full time job on it. For Nnewi town itself the actual number of deaths is 169 and the number of returnees is 9,411. To make for better reading, the exercise by Economic Planning Commission is reproduced below as part of our report instead of exhibiting it as appendix to the report.
Sample Estimate of Biafrans Killed and Those
Who Returned from Nigeria May 1966 to
December 1967.
To The Chairman,
Atrocities Commission
The purpose of this survey is to estimate by a sample the total number of Eastern Nigerians (hereinafter called BIAFRANS) killed in Nigeria from May, 1966 to about December, 1967. The survey is also intended to provide an estimate of the number of Biafrans who returned from Nigeria about the same period and the extent of property of all types left behind in that country. In this analysis, however, only the number of Biafrans killed and those who returned are shown. Estimates of property left behind will be produced in due course.
This is a survey best carried out by a complete ‘census’ that is, complete count of the persons affected and as such the limitation of a sample estimate should be borne in mind. Furthermore, the survey was conducted at a time of great instability and population shifts. A number of areas was disturbed and on account of this, the survey could not be conducted in Annang, Calabar, Eket, Nsukka, Ogoja and Uyo provinces. Yanagoa province was not covered because arrangements for the survey in the provinces failed. Fresh arrangements have been made to conduct the survey there.
The results of the survey are summarised in Tables 1 and 2, and the questionnaires used are attached as Appendices A and B. In the eleven Provinces covered, a total of 32,604 deaths was estimated. Of this number, 27,939 occurred during the 1966 Pogrom and 4,665 in the Mid West Region of Nigeria massacres of September and October, 1967. The number of Biafrans who returned from Nigeria in these Provinces totalled 1,129,433. Two areas of high migratory characteristics are of particular interest. These are Nnewi and Mbaise Divisions. In Nnewi Divisions alone, a total of 2,300 deaths were registered while those who returned numbered 90,460. For Mbaise, 657 deaths were recorded. The number of ‘returnees’ was as high as 31,957.
The frame for the sample is that provided by the recent tabulation of 1963 census population by provinces, Divisions and Local Councils. In each Province, the population is shown for each of the Local councils making up the county council.
After eliminating major urban population, including the entire population of Enugu Capital Territory, was decided that a population of 200,000 should constitute one sample point and in this way 58 sample points were chosen for all Biafra distributed as follows:
- ABA Province = 2 POINTS
- ABAKALIKI ” = 6 “
- ANNANG ” = 3 “
- AWKA ” = 4 ‘’
- CALABAR ” = 2 ‘’
- DEGEMA ” = 2 “
- EKET ” = 3 ‘’
- NSUKKA ” = 3 ”
- OJI RIVER ” = 3 “
- OKIGWE ” = 4 “
- ORLU ” = 3 “
- OWERRI ” = 4 “
- OPOBO ” = 2 “
- ONITSHA “ = 3 “
- OGOJA “ ” = 2 “
- P. HARCOUT ” = 3 “
- UMUAHIA ” = 3 “
- UYO ” = 4 “
- YANAGOA ” = 2 ”
58 Sample Points
From the same administrative structure, the Local Councils within the Province were numbered serially as they were tabulated and using a table of random numbers, the sample Local Councils were selected.
In the selected Local Councils, the population exposed-to- risk of death in, and returning from, Nigeria was subjected to complete enumeration.
We have taken account of the terrible massacres of Biafrans which took place in September and October, 1967 in the Mid West Region of Nigeria by regarding as having been killed all Biafrans who were resident in that Republic and who had not returned by the time of the survey. In view of this, our estimate of Biafrans killed in Nigeria covers a more recent period than if we had stopped at say May 1967. We have provided a separate column in Table 1 to show the number killed in the Mid West Region (4,665) which constitutes about 12% of the total number killed in Nigeria.
Originally, we planned to tabulate Biafrans killed and those who returned from Nigeria by Administrative Divisions. This idea was abandoned because of the size of the sample and the method of estimation. If the work of tabulation was carried out as originally planned there would have been some errors of non-random nature and the result would, in most cases, be mere guess work. The tabulation is, therefore, shown by Provinces only. We could not, however, resist the temptation of calculating the figures for Nnewi and Mbaise Divisions as shown in paragraph 3 above. People from these Divisions possess high migratory characteristic and it is of great interest to reveal the extent to which they were affected by the pogrom.
In due course, the mass of data collected on age, sex. marital status, month of event, occupation, etc. will be analysed. The analysis will be confined to actual field data, and by ratio estimate’ we can learn a great deal about the characteristics of Biafrans who lived, worked or died outside their homeland.
It may be necessary to add that the method used in estimating the provincial population is uniform in all sample areas covered by the field investigators that is, raising the total survey population by the sum of the number of local councils in the Division. The raising factor is N divided by K where N is the sum of Local Councils and K the number of sampled Local Councils. If K> 1 the mean of the sum is obtained and simply multiplied by N.
In Awka Province, Njikoka Division was not sampled, and we had therefore to apply to it the data collected from Nnewi and Ukpo in Onitsha Province. We felt that Nnewi would have a high risk-of-exposure while Ukpor would have a ‘normal’ risk-of-exposure. By averaging the two, we applied the mean to Njikoka. For the estimate of the other Administrative Divisions in Onitsha Province, we used the result for Ukpo Local Council area as more applicable to the area than the result for Nnewi Local Council area.
There are two Tables: Table 1 which shows the absolute and the proportionate number of Biafrans killed and Table 2 reflecting the wider problem of those who returned from all parts of Nigeria. The Province with no entries are those where the survey was not carried out. It can be seen from Table 1 that for the Provinces surveyed, the estimate of deaths is 32,604 with Onitsha Province having the highest provincial total (21.1%) and Degema Province the lowest (0.6%).
Since this survey an estimate for the provinces not covered has been made, see page 166.
In Table 2, the total number of Biafrans who returned from Nigeria is 1,129,4 This number covers only the Provinces surveyed. It is shown that Onitsha has the highest number of persons returned, followed by Awka and Owerri. Degema Province has just over 1,000. In column 3 of this Table, we introduced the population of 1963 Census to show the magnitude of the relative increase in the population of Biafra and the consequent refugee problem. It has increased the population (less the effect of natural growth factors) to 13.5 million. The full effect of the increase in the population can only be appreciated when it is realised that very few populations can be so affected without a dramatic disruption in the social order. In some provinces such as Awka, Onitsha and Okigwe, the increase in population is as high as 10%.
Table 1
Biafrans Killed in Nigeria
| Provinces
(1) |
Total
Biafrans Killed (2) |
%Of
Total (3) |
Number
of Biafrans Killed in 1966 Pogrom (4) |
Number
of Biafrans Killed in Mid West Region (5) |
| ABA | 1,128 | 3.5 | 748 | 380 |
| ABAKALIKI | 4,800 | 14.7 | 3.972 | 828 |
| ANNANG | – | – | – | – |
| AWKA | 6,385 | 19.6 | 6,001 | 384 |
| CALABAR | – | – | – | – |
| DEOEMA | 180 | 0.6 | 180 | – |
| EKET | – | – | – | – |
| ENUGU(Capital
Territory) |
– | – | – | – |
| NSUKKA | – | – | – | – |
| OGOJA | – | – | – | – |
| OJI RIVER | 2,906 | 8.9 | 2,321 | 585 |
| OKOGWI | 953 | 2.9 | 709 | 244 |
| ONITSHA | 6,889 | 21.1 | 6.416 | 471 |
| OPOBO | – | – | – | |
| ORLU | 1,716 | 5.3 | 1,228 | 488 |
| OWERRI | 4,960 | 15.2 | 4,292 | 668 |
| PORT-
HARCOURT |
1,188 | 3.6 | 900 | 288 |
| UMUAHIA | 1,499 | 4.6 | 1,170 | 329 |
| UYO | – | – | – | – |
| YENOGOA | – | – | – | – |
| ALL
PROVINCES SURVEYED |
32,694 |
100 |
27,939 | 4,665 |
Table 2
| Provinces
(1) |
Biafrans
Who Returned (2) |
1963
Census Population (3) |
Total
Population (2+3) (4) |
| ABA | 37,232 | 541,968 | 579,200 |
| ABAKALIKI | 25,924 | 1,233,092 | 1,261,016 |
| ANNANG | – | 646,857 | 646,857 |
| AWKA | 243,376 | 694,396 | 937,772 |
| CALABAR | – | 321,427 | 321,427 |
| DEGEMA | 1,215 | 400,740 | 401,955 |
| EKET | – | 763,162 | 765,162 |
| ENUGU | – | 138,457 | 138,457 |
| NSUKKA | – | 638,587 | 638,587 |
| OGOJA | – | 367,441 | 367,441 |
| OJI RIVER | 132,189 | 623,891 | 756,080 |
| OKIGWE | 73,612 | 743,832 | 817,644 |
| ONITSHA | 262,527 | 873,711 | 1,136,238 |
| OPOBO | – | 405,191 | 405,191 |
| ORLU | 56,888 | 640,106 | 696,994 |
| OWERRI
PORT |
223,948 | 922,840 | 1,152,758 |
| HARCOURT | 21,727 | 812,034 | 833,761 |
| UMUAHIA | 44,625 | 478,200 | 522,825 |
| UYO | – | 834,814 | 834,814 |
| YENOGOA | – | 309,716 | 309,716 |
| TOTAL | 1,129,433 | 12,394,462 | 13,523,895 |
Economic Planning Commission Enugu
Government of the Republic of Biafra
Biafrans Killed in Nigeria, from 29th May, 1966
Appendix ‘A’
Province ………………………. Division ………………………… Local Council …………………………Village
| 1
SERIAL NO. OF PERSON |
2
NAME OF PERSON |
3
COMPOUND OR FAMILY |
4
SEX |
5
AGE (LAST BIRTHDAY) |
6
MARITAL STATUS |
7
TOWN OR LOCALITY RESIDENT IN NIGERIA |
8
MONTH KILLED |
9
OCCUPATION |
|
|
Government of the Republic of Biafra
Biafrans Who Returned from Nigeria, from May, 1966
Appendix ‘B’
Province ………………………. Division ………………………… Local Council …………………………Village
| 1
SERIAL NO. OF PERSON |
2
NAME OF PERSON |
3
COMPOUND OR FAMILY |
4
SEX |
5
AGE (LAST BIRTHDAY) |
6
MARITAL STATUS |
7
TOWN OR LOCALITY RESIDENT IN NIGERIA |
8
MONTH RETURNED |
9
OCCUPATION |
10
PROPERTY LOST |
||
|
|
(A)
Houses |
(B)
Estimated Value |
(C)
Value of Other Property £
|
||||||||
To The Chairman,
Atrocities Committee,
Estimate of Biafrans Killed and Those Who Returned from Northern Nigeria (for Annang,
Calabar, Eket, Nsukka, Ogoja, Opobo, Uyo and Yenogoa Provinces Disturbed Areas.)
A survey was conducted, at your request, of the number of Biafrans killed in the 1966 pogrom in Nigeria as well as of those who returned as refugees. As a result of the difficulty in conducting this survey in the disturbed Provinces, a device for obtaining the estimate of both the Biafrans from those Provinces killed during the 1966 pogrom and those who returned had to be evolved. Having therefore observed that some of the disturbed areas have identical migratory characteristics with some areas covered during the survey, figures for these areas are used as indices for the disturbed areas after making necessary adjustments with respect to population and the number of local councils.
In order to arrive at the estimates for Annang and Calabar Provinces, we applied the average figures per Local Council obtained for Aba Province to the number of local councils in these Provinces. Average data for Umuahia Province were applied to Eket and Uyo Provinces while those for Degema Provinces were applied to Opobo and Yenagoa. Average figures for Abakaliki Province were employed to obtain estimate for Ogoja Province. For Nsukka, we applied the average figures for Abakaliki to obtain the number of dead, but to obtain the number of ‘returnees ’ we applied the average figures for Awka. A large number of people from Nsukka lived and farmed in Southern parts of Northern Nigeria – Idoma and Igala particularly – and it is assumed that Biafrans in these areas were not subject to the same degree of massacre as those in the far North, where the preponderance of people from Awka lived. Consequently, the average figure of ‘returnees’ for Awka is more likely to apply to Nsukka, and by the same reasoning, the average figure of death for Abakaliki more likely applies. The result obtained by using the above technique is summarised in the adjoining tables.
Estimate of Biafrans Killed and Those Who Returned from Northern Nigeria
| Provinces | Biafrans Killed | Biafrans Who
Returned |
| ANNANG | 1,000 | 30,920 |
| CALABAR | 725 | 22,417 |
| EKET | 2,303 | 72,709 |
| NSUKKA | 3,660 | 275,903 |
| OGOJA | 920 | 20,096 |
| OPOBO | 238 | 574 |
| UYO | 2,352 | 74,256 |
| YENAGOA | 575 | 1 433 |
| TOTAL | 12,793 | 498,310 |
Economic Planning Commission Enugu
A total of 12,793 deaths was thus estimated for the Provinces not covered in the sample survey, and the number of ‘returnees’ put at 498,310. Incorporating those figures obtained from Provinces covered by the survey which amounted to 32,604 deaths and1,129,433 ‘returnees; the total estimate of Biafrans killed during the pogrom and subsequent massacres would be 45,397 and ‘returnees’ 1,627, 743.
Another method adopted to ascertain the extent of loss of life was by interrogating witnesses who returned from the affected towns.
The panic, the confusion, the fear and the flight for dear life made it impossible for many witnesses to give any estimate at all. Some were able to give assessments for only those parts of the town where they were overtaken by the disturbances. The evidence of some related to the early parts of the disturbances before they took shelter while others stayed on longer and therefore were in a position to see more. A few had access to mortuaries and even read the number tags used in enumerating the corpses. Yet other witnesses had their inside information from officials actually connected with handling and recording of the dead. In rare cases like those of Mr. Okwawa (Kano) and Miss Ifenyinwa Ogbolu (Jos) the witnesses were in a position to survey the slaughter because they were thought at the time not to belong to the hunted group.
The intelligence of the witness and all these other factors were taken into consideration in assessing the credibility of the figures for the dead given by each witness.
The results of this exercise in respect of each of the towns about which relevant evidence was given is given in subsequent pages.
Accepted Figure for Loss of Lives
| TOWN | MAY-JUNE | SEPT. – OCT. |
| KAINJI | – | 2,180 |
| GUSAU | 604 | – |
| MINNA | – | 500 |
| GOMBE | 1504 | – |
| ZARIA | 120 | 1,000 |
| VOM | – | 40 |
| JOS | – | 2,000 |
| KATSINA | 123 | – |
| NOURU | – | 426 |
| QAISHAU | – | 37 |
| MAIDUGURI | – | 1,000 |
| KANO | 250 | 7,425 |
| YOLA (JIMETA) | – | 45 |
| BAUCHI | 350 | – |
| TOWN | MAY-JUNE | SEPT – OCT |
| KADUNA | 20/50 (JULY) | 1,000 |
| ARGUNGU | 125 | – |
| KONTAGORA | 50 | – |
| MAKURDI | – | 80 |
| ZAKIBIAH & YANDEV | – | 396 |
| JALINGO | 2 | – |
| FUNTUA | 4 | – |
| NISO | – | 12 |
| NAIKOKONKELE | – | 1 |
| DAURA | 2 | – |
| LAFIA & MADA | – | 8 |
| IKEJA | */38(JULY) | – |
| SOKOTO | 1 | – |
| BLABLI | – | 40 |
| BUKURU MINEFIELD | ||
| AREA | – | 300+ |
| 2,265 88 | 16,490 | |
| Grand Total | 17,843 |
Assessment of Credibility
Kainji
Witness: C.O. Obiefuna – 57
Day: 18
Figure: 2,180
Grounds for credibility: This was a derivation based on a knowledged of the number of Easterners resident in the Kainji up to 27/9/66, on the number who were assembled at the police station before the massacre, on the knowledge that all avenues of escape had been cut off, on the assessment that the only people who escaped alive were those carried by police lorries and some tippers, which number could be determined. On the whole a reasonable deduction. The ferocity was confirmed by other witnesses not in a position to give figures about the dead, because of the suddenness of the attack and the general confusion that followed.
On the grounds for credibility above, 2,180 accepted.
Gusau May- June
Witness: D. O. Princewill – (52)
Day: 17
Figure: 300
Grounds for credibility: Witness lives in Kaduna and bases his estimate on telephone conversations.
Witness: M. S. Ilochuonwu – (66)
Day: 20
Figure: over 50
Grounds for credibility: Witness resident in Gusau from 1935 gives this estimate for 1st and 2nd June but killing continued after he had gone into protection on 2/6/66.
Witness: J. J. Okeke – (67)
Day: 20
Figure: 60-80
Grounds for credibility: Witness says police figure up to 2/6/66 was 46 but he considers it underestimate as many bodies were not seen and killing continued up to 4th June.
Witness: F. U. Nnachetta – (96)
Day: 27
Figure: 51
Grounds for credibility: Witness says the Rev. Father told him 40 were buried before 4/6/66 and he knows of 11 burnt completely. He had not taken into consideration any bodies not yet brought in before 4/6/66.
Witness: I.B. Udumaga – (166)
Day: 38
Figure: 80-100
Grounds for credibility: Witness is a police inspector in Kaduna and this is a mere estimate for Gasau before Police blacked our information early in June.
Mr. F. U. Nnachetta was quite authentic about the figure of 51 he gave, his sources being his personal knowledge of 11 burnt and the Rev. Father on 40 buried. But these were the figures before 4/ 6/66 when he left. Taking into consideration that a few fugitives were killed in flight and their bodies not yet brought in, it is reasonable to accept the figure of 60 which is the concensus given by witnesses who actually lived in Gusau at the time. D. O. Princewill and I.B. Udumaga were both resident in Kaduna and gave estimates from there. More credence should be given to those on the spot especially as their estimates were very close.
Accepted 60 minimum
Minna – September 24-26
Witness: B. U. Uchelue – 96
Day: 11
Figure: Over 500
Grounds for credibility: Witness himself recovered consciousness in the mortuary where he was dumped with the dead. Based this estimate on killings in the railway station, those killed on the approach roads to the station and those killed in their homes and offices.
Based on the ferocity of the attack as corroborated by other witnesses this witness who was the only one in a position to give the figure for the whole town has probably given a conservative figure. It has to be accepted as such.
Accepted over 500.
Witness: C. Eneje – (47)
Day: 15
Figure: 9
Grounds for credibility: This was for Kaltingo but (Kaltingo) witness was only 3 weeks old in the town and had not known the people resident there.
Witness: V. O. Ekealor – (46)
Day: 16
Figure: 38
Grounds for credibility: Killing started late on 3/6/66. Witness saw 38 bodies in the mortuary in the morning of 4/6/66. But killings were still continuing and not all dead bodies had been brought in. Some bodies still in gutters, bush and Indoors.
Witness: P. C. Emejulu – (93)
Day: 27
Figure: 100 -150
Grounds for credibility: Witness was arrested on the 4th and estimate is given up to the time of his arrest in Gombe. He gave himself up to the mobile police.
Witness: E. C. Ugorji – (85)
Day: 26
Figure: 50
Grounds for credibility: Witness visited the mortuary by mid-day on 4th June. 1966. He was an inpatient. He courted over 40 before breaking down and estimates 50. Bodies were still coming in at that time.
Witness: S. E. O. Nwadiugwu
Day: 29
Figure: 150
Grounds for credibility: Witness went to the mortuary on 6/6/ 66. The dead bodies were numbered with label tags. He saw 150. There may have been more but the smell drove him out.
Witness: F, O. Egonu
Day: 28
Figure: Over 150
Grounds for credibility: His is an estimate based on the ferocity of the attack.
150 was the figure given by Mr. Nwadiugwu who visited the mortuary on 6/6/66 two days after the killing had started. He actually saw the number 150 among the enumerated dead bodies, so that this is the minimum. The estimate of Messrs. Emejuiu and Kgomu strike the same 150. The other witnesses had given estimates of what they saw in the mortuary in the early period of the attack and so do not reflect the totality of the killings. Accept 150 minimum.
Zaria Town May – October
Witness: I.W.A.N. Onuoha – 8
Day: 6
Figure: Over 200 (May-June)
Grounds/or credibility: From anonymous writer “John Citizen” to Provincial Secretary, Zaria.
Witness: G. Nwosu
Day: 6
Figure: Over 20 (May)
Grounds for credibility: This was for Junior Service quarters of Ahmadu Bello University. Witness was on the run and did not see much.
Witness: W. C. Alofoje – 9
Day: 7
Figure: 50 – 70 (Sept.)
Grounds for credibility: This was at the railway platform only.
Witness: S. A Okeke
Day: 8
Figure: 55 (Oct.)
Grounds for credibility: This is nominal extract from railway gazette of November, 1966 giving list of killed railway officials only. Witness said it was incomplete.
Witness: M.A. Ajemba
Day: 10
Figure: 2,300 (Sept.)
Grounds for credibility: Witness gives estimates as follows: (One) Sabongari 1,000 (Two) Tudun Wada 700 (Three) Samaru 300 (Four) Mucho2Q0 (Five) Nigwa Fulani 100. He was on the run. Assessment based on the ferocity of attack and the number escaping by train being smaller than those killed.
Witness: Harriet Venn -121
Day: 31
Figure: Over 100 (May)
Grounds for credibility: Witness actually saw those bodies in and around the hospital mortuary on 31/6/66 while looking for the corpse of her husband. Bodies on the streets and elsewhere not included.
