Court Adjourns IPOB Leader, Nnamdi Kanu’s N1 Billion Suit Against Nigerian Government
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has adjourned a fresh N1billion suit filed by the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu against the Nigerian government and its secret police - the Department of State Service (DSS) to March 18 for hearing.
Recall that Justice James Omotosho had on January 8, when no lawyer represented Kanu in court, fixed March 4, for hearing on the suit.
Kanu through his lead counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, had filed the latest suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1633/2023 for the enforcement of his fundamental rights while in detention in the custody of the DSS.
The IPOB leader in the originating motion dated and filed on December 4, 2023 sued the Nigerian Government, Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), DSS and its Director-General as 1st to 4th respondents.
Kanu filed the suit pursuant to Order II, Rules 1 & 2 of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, among others.
In the motion, Kanu among other things prayed the court for “A declaration that the respondents’ act of forcible seizure and photocopying of confidential legal documents pertaining to facilitating the preparation of his defence which were brought to him at the respondents’ detention facility by his lawyers, amounted to denial of his rights to be defended by legal practitioners of his own choice.
“A declaration that the respondents’ act of refusing or preventing his counsel from taking notes of details of counsel’s professional discussions/consultations with him at DSS detention, with said discussions/consultations relating to preparation of his defence amounted to denial of his right to be given adequate facilities for the preparation of his defence by legal practitioners of his own choice.
“A declaration that the respondents’ act of eavesdropping on his confidential consultations/conversations with his lawyers on matters relating to preparation of his defence during the lawyers’ visitations amounted to denial of applicant’s right to be given adequate facilities for the preparation of his defence and to be.defended by legal practitioners of his own choice.”
The IPOB leader described the acts as illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and constituted an infringement of his fundamental right to fair hearing as enshrined and guaranteed under Section 36(6)(b) & (c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and Article 7(1)(c) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights.
Therefore, he further sought an order of injunction restraining and prohibiting the respondents from their act of forcible seizure and photocopying of confidential legal documents brought to him at the detention facility by his lawyers.
“An order of injunction restraining and prohibiting the respondents from their act of refusing or preventing the applicant’s counsel from taking notes of details of counsel’s professional discussions/consultations with the applicant during the counsel’s visitation with the applicant at the premises of respondents’ detention facility.
“An order of injunction restraining and prohibiting the respondents from their act of eavesdropping on the applicant’s confidential consultations/conversations with his lawyers on matters relating to preparation of applicant’s defence during the lawyers’ visitations with the applicant at the detention facility.”
He also sought an order compelling the respondents to issue an official letter of apology to him for the infringement of his fundamental right to fair hearing, and an order mandating the respondents to jointly and severally pay the sum of N1 billion as damages for the mental, emotional, psychological and other damages he suffered as a result of his rights’ breach.
On Monday at the resumed hearing, counsel to the defence, I.I. Hassan, told the court that they were yet to be served with processes in the matter.
In response, Kanu’s lead counsel, Alloy Ejimakor, told the court that everything needed for the service of their processes on the defence had been perfected.
Ejimakor wondered why the originating motion and other applications were yet to be served on the defence by the bailiff.
After listening to both lawyers, Justice Omotosho adjourned the matter to March 18.
Comments
Post a Comment