The Abuja division of the Federal High Court on Monday, dismissed the N1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu against the Federal Government.
In the dismissed suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1633/2023, Kanu was seeking N1 billion as damages from the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Department of State Services, for alleged right violation.
He claimed that the DSS and its Director-General violated his right to a fair hearing by allegedly preventing his lawyers from having unhindered interactions with him where he is being detained, in preparation for his defence in his criminal trial.
But delivering his judgment on Monday, Justice James Omotosho, held that Kanu failed to provide credible evidence to sustain his claims that his interactions with his lawyers were interfered with and that he was denied unhindered access to his lawyers.
Justice Omotosho equally held that the detained Biafra state agitator failed to prove allegations that DSS officials eavesdropped on his conversations with his lawyers, which constituted a breach of his right to fair hearing.
He further ruled that the applicant failed to prove that his lawyers were stopped from taking notes at meetings held with him during visitation, and further held that there was no evidence before him showing that he was denied a fair hearing as claimed in his suit.
The court accordingly dismissed the suit for lacking in merit.
Kanu had through his special counsel, Aloy Ejimakor, filed an originating motion dated December 4, 2023, against the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the AGF, the DSS, and its DG, as 1st to 4th respondents respectively.
The suit which sought the enforcement of his fundamental rights while in detention at the DSS, was brought under Order II, Rules 1 & 2 of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009, among others.
In the motion, Kanu prayed for “a declaration that the respondents’ act of forcible seizure and photocopying of confidential legal documents about facilitating the preparation of his defence which were brought to him at the respondents’ detention facility by his lawyers, amounted to a denial of his rights to be defended by legal practitioners of his own choice”.
He also sought a declaration that the respondents’ act of refusing or preventing his counsel from taking notes of details of the counsel’s professional discussions/consultations with him at DSS detention is unlawful and amounts to a denial of his right to be given adequate facilities for the preparation of his defence by legal practitioners of his own choice.
He further sought a declaration that the respondents’ act of eavesdropping on his confidential consultations or conversations with his lawyers amounted to denial of his right, among others.
Kanu, on this note, 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.
He also sought an order mandating the respondents to jointly and severally pay the sum of N1bn as damages for the mental, emotional, psychological and other damages he suffered as a result of his rights’ breach, among others.
