Convicted IPOB leader, Nnamdi Kanu
The bid by Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), to secure an urgent transfer from the Sokoto Correctional Centre suffered a major setback on Monday as the Federal High Court in Abuja refused to grant his request.
Kanu, who was convicted of terrorism-related offences, had approached the court through a motion ex-parte seeking an order compelling the Federal Government and 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.”
As an alternative, he also asked to be moved to a nearer centre—such as Suleja or Keffi—to enable him “effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.”
But Justice James Omotosho firmly declined the request, ruling that such an application could not be granted behind the backs of the Federal Government and the NCoS.
He stressed that both respondents must be formally notified and given an opportunity to respond.
“A law school student will know that this application cannot be granted ex-parte,” the judge said pointedly.
Judge Questions Motion, Legal Procedure
Earlier, the court had queried Kanu’s lawyer, Demdoo Asan of the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON), about the wording of the first relief, which sought an order “compelling” the Federal Government and NCoS to act.
When asked if he still wished to pursue that relief under an ex-parte procedure, Asan conceded and agreed that Relief One be struck out.
Justice Omotosho pressed further, asking whether the Federal Government and NCoS should not be served with the application.
“Do you think it is by ex-parte motion this application ought to be granted, having it in mind that judgment was delivered when the two parties were present?” he asked.
Asan eventually admitted, “My lord, the respondents have the right to be heard.”
The court then struck out the first relief and ordered that the necessary parties be served before any further consideration.
Issues With Notice of Appeal
The judge also faulted Kanu’s notice of appeal, observing that it was dated November 10—ten days before the judgment delivered on November 20.
After asking Asan to confirm the date, Justice Omotosho stated plainly that there was effectively “no notice of appeal before him.”
Asan informed the court that he had only been instructed to take up the brief after being recalled from leave, and assured the court that the defence team would “do the needful.”
Next Steps
The matter was adjourned to January 27, 2026, to allow Kanu’s legal team to properly serve the Federal Government and the NCoS, after which the application will be heard.
This development comes after the court, on December 4, refused to recognise Kanu’s younger brother, Prince Emmanuel, who attempted to appear for him despite not being a lawyer. The court then ordered Kanu to secure proper legal representation before proceeding.
(NAN)
