A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, has fixed April 18 for the hearing of the N1 billion compensation suit filed by against the Federal Government and the Department of State Services (DSS) by the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.
The presiding judge, Honourable Justice James Omotosho on Monday adjourned the matter after Kanu’s lawyer, Alloy Ejimakor, agreed to respond to a counter affidavit jointly filed by the DSS and its Director-General (DG).
The counsel to the Federal Government, Gbenga Oladimeji told the court that he team had not filed their response due to the fact that he was just informed in Court on Monday (today) and subsequently prayed the court to give him more time to enable him respond.
The counsel to the DSS, Abdul Danlami however, told the court that they had already filed their response and were ready for the substantive hearing of the matter.
The lawyer to Kanu, Ejimakor thereafter prayed the court for more time to enable him file a further affidavit in response to fresh issues raised by the DSS in their counter affidavit.
Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in suite no: FHC/ABJ/CS/1633/2023 had filed the suit for the enforcement of his fundamental rights while in detention.
In the originating motion dated and filed December 4, the applicant sued the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN), Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), DSS and its DG as 1st to 4th respondents, respectively
The which was filed pursuant to Order II, Rules 1 & 2 of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, among others.
In the motion, Kanu prayed the court for eight reliefs, including, “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.”
The IPOB leader stated that the acts of the DSS and Federal Government as illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional and 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. He therefore, prayed the court for 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.
