On Monday, the Federal High Court in Abuja set Feb. 28 as the date for hearing a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by Nnamdi Kanu, the Leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).
Justice Taiwo Taiwo set the date after Department of State Services (DSS) counsel, Idowu Awo, informed the court that his clients had a counter-affidavit that had not been served on Kanu.
At the resumption of the hearing, Awo asked the court for more time to serve the application on Kanu’s lawyer, Maxwell Opara.
ATTENTION: Click “HERE” to join our WhatsApp group and receive News updates directly on your WhatsApp!
However, Opara described the DSS lawyer’s request as an attempt to continue subjecting his client to solitary confinement and other inhumane treatment.
He claimed that the DSS’s counter-affidavit was filed too late.
He claims that despite the fact that the application was dated January 28 and that counsel for the DSS has his contact information, it was not served on him until now.
In addition, Simon Enock, the lawyer for the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), informed that he had filed a motion for an extension of time to regularize their counter-affidavit.
Neither the IPOB leader’s counsel, Opara, nor the DSS lawyer objected to the application.
Justice Taiwo, who noted that the case was coming before him for the first time, scheduled a hearing for Feb. 28.
Kanu, through his lawyer, Opara, had in the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1585/2021, named the Director-General of DSS and the office as the first and second respondents.
He also joined the AGF as the third respondent in the suit, which was filed on December 13, 2021.
In the originating motion, his lawyer asked the court to declare that, in carrying out their lawful duties, the respondents should abide by the provisions of Chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the Africa Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, as they pertain to the rights of Nigerian citizens.
Opara also urged the court to rule that Kanu, despite his detention, was entitled to the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion guaranteed by the law.
“A DECLARATION that the applicant, even though a detainee, is entitled to the enjoyment of his right to human dignity as guaranteed under Sections 34(1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution,” he asked (as amended).
“A DECLARATION that the respondents’ action in continuing to hold the applicant in their detention facility without transferring him to Kuje Correctional Centre is subjecting the applicant to mental torture because it is not the place designated for keeping awaiting trial inmates,” among other things.
The lawyers then asked the court to issue an order directing the respondents to immediately provide Kanu with facilities and materials for religious practice, as well as an order directing them to remove him from solitary confinement, among other things.
The DSS, however, disagreed with Kanu in a counter-affidavit deposed to by Hamza Pandogari and filed on Jan. 28.
Pandogari claimed that Kanu was apprehended by personnel of the first and second respondents on reasonable suspicion of treason and terrorism by inciting violence against the people of Nigeria under the guise of succession.
According to the officer, Kanu is the leader of the proscribed organization known as the IPOB.
He stated that he was currently on trial before Justice Binta Nyako on a 15-count charge.
Pandogari stated that, despite the fact that Nyako had previously admitted Kanu to bail sometime in April 2017, he jumped the bail but was later rearrested to continue his trial.
Contrary to paragraphs 4 (a) and (b) of Kanu’s affidavit, the officer stated, “there is no such order of the court that applicant should have unrestricted access to the medical practitioner of his choice while in the custody of the first and second respondent.”
He also stated that, contrary to popular belief, Kanu was receiving adequate and high-quality medical care when needed.
“The applicant has unrestricted access to medical practitioners who are experts in their respective fields of medical practice.”
He claimed that among the experts who had been attending to Kanu’s health were Dr. O. FASAN, Consultant Cardiologist from the National Hospital, Abuja; Dr. A OHUNMWANGHO, Consultant Gastroenterologist, University of Abuja Teaching Hospital; and Prof. MBAKWE, Consultant CARDIOLOGIST, Lagos State University Teaching Hospital.
“That, in addition to the regular routine medical checkup, the applicant receives prompt medical attention upon any request or complaint by the applicant relating to his health,” he stated.
According to the officer, the applicant (Kanu) has never missed a trial due to illness.
He claimed that, contrary to popular belief, the DSS never tortured Kanu physically or mentally while he was in its custody.
“That while in custody, the applicant has several privileges, including but not limited to entertaining a total of six visitors of his choice every week, three on Monday and Thursday, the days set out by the court as applicant’s visiting days,” he added.
In a counter-affidavit deposed to by Zekeri on Friday, the AGF stated, “I did not violate or infringe on any fundamental right (s) of the applicant as deposed to in the entire paragraphs of the affidavit in support of the application.”
Friday, who claimed Kanu was not in a position to professionally assess the competency or otherwise of the medical practitioner attending to him in DSS custody, stated that the security agency “has a medical clinic well-equipped with highly trained medical personnel that have been attending to the applicant’s medical needs while he remains in custody.”
He also denied Kanu’s confinement in solitary confinement.
He is detained in a hygienic and standard facility, according to Friday.
