Court hears Nnamdi Kanu’s motion seeking transfer from Sokoto correctional centre
The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court has fixed December 8 for hearing in a motion ex parte filed by leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.
Justice James Omotosho fixed the date on Thursday after he declined to give audience to Mr Kanu’s younger brother, Prince Emmanuel, who announced his appearance for the IPOB leader despite not being a lawyer.
Mr Kanu, in the ex parte motion personally signed by him, sought an order that, in view of the impossibility of the applicant (Kanu) being present in court or chambers to personally move the motion, “this motion shall be deemed moved in absentia and in terms of the motion.”
He also sought an order compelling the federal government and/or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) “to forthwith transfer him from the Sokoto Correctional Facility to a custodial facility within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.”
Alternately, Mr Kanu sought an order transferring him to the court’s “immediate environs, such as the Suleja or the Keffi Custodial Centre, for the purpose of enabling the applicant to effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.”
Mr Kanu, who was convicted for terrorism offences on November 20, is presently serving the life imprisonment at the Sokoto State Correctional Centre.
The convict, who sacked his team of lawyers prior to the judgement, opted to defend himself.
When the case was called on Thursday, Mr Omotosho asked for the appearance of a lawyer.
But Mr Kanu’s younger brother, Mr Emmanuel, who is not a lawyer, then announced an appearance for the IPOB leader.
The judge then told Mr Emmanuel that such an application cannot be moved by him.
He said,“This ex parte motion cannot be moved on the convict’s behalf because you are not a legal practitioner.”
The judge, who said only a legal practitioner could move the motion, advised Mr Emmanuel to either engage a lawyer or approach the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria for legal representation since the law allows it.
“When I said representation, it is not his (Kanu’s) father, brother, sister or relations I meant. I mean his counsel. I am not going to the merit of this application now in the interest of justice.
“But you cannot represent a human being when you are not a lawyer, you can only represent a corporate body. Therefore, you cannot move the application because you are not a solicitor or advocate of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
“For you to be qualified as a lawyer, it will take you another six years or thereabouts. So get a counsel to move the application,” the judge said.
When Mr Emmanuel asked for the next adjourned date, Mr Omotosho said though there were cases on the court docket on Monday, Mr Kanu would be accommodated.
“Thank you, sir,” Mr Emmanuel responded.
The judge, therefore, cautioned against misleading the public on how Mr Kanu could compile his record of appeal.
Mr Omotosho said contrary to a remark by Aloy Ejimakor, one of Mr Kanu’s lawyers who was later engaged as a consultant, the convict need not be in court for his record to be compiled.
“Let me advise generally so that you don’t delay the process. The issue of appeal – I must not pretend that I am not part of society.
“Mr Ejimakor granted an interview, talking about the deprivation of the defendant (Kanu) to compile his record. That is an erroneous opinion.
“The defendant may not be in court to compile record. His attendance is not required, though the appearance of his representative may be required. The rights of a defendant is different from the rights of a convict,” he said.
The judge equally put the question to lawyers in court on whether it is a necessity for Mr Kanu to be present before his record could be compiled, and they responded in the negative.
Mr Omotosho, who advised Mr Emmanuel to engage a knowledgeable lawyer, said that a lawyer who is grossly inadequate in knowledge of appellate procedure should stop misleading the public.
“I think it is high time we addressed the right opinion. Appropriate legal advice is necessary,” he said.
Mr Omotosho consequently refused to give audience to Mr Emmanuel, since he is not a lawyer.
The judge adjourned the matter until December 8 for hearing of the pending application.
Mr Kanu, while giving eight grounds in the ex-parte motion marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, said he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the court on November 20.
He said the judge, in sentencing him, ordered his detention in any correctional centre in Nigeria except Kuje Correctional Centre.
“On the 21st of November, 2025, the applicant was transferred to and is currently detained at the Sokoto Correctional Facility, which is over 700 kilometres from Abuja. The applicant, who is currently unrepresented by counsel, intends to personally exercise his constitutional right of appeal against the conviction and sentence.
“The preparation of the notice of appeal and the record of appeal requires the applicant’s personal interface with the Registry of this Honourable Court and the Court of Appeal in Abuja. All persons critical to assisting the applicant in preparing his appeal, including his relatives, associates, and legal consultants, are based in Abuja.
“The applicant’s continued detention in Sokoto renders his constitutional right to appeal impracticable, occasioning exceptional hardship and potentially defeating the said right, in violation of Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended),” he said.
Mr Kanu said it would be in the interest of justice that he be transferred to a facility near Abuja to effectively prosecute his appeal.
Comments
Post a Comment