Kehinde Ishola
The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, on Friday, November 28, struck out an appeal filed by the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, challenging alleged violations of his fundamental human rights by the Director-General of the Department of State Services (DSS) and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF).
The three-member panel of the appellate court held that the appeal lacked merit and had become academic following Kanu’s conviction and sentence to life imprisonment by the Federal High Court in Abuja on November 20.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Boloukuromo Ugo ruled that the claims of rights violations, including alleged denial of adequate medical care, dignity of person and freedom of religion, could no longer be entertained since Kanu was no longer in DSS custody but had been transferred to a correctional facility.
Justice Ugo noted that Kanu’s counsel, Maxwell Opara, confirmed at the commencement of the hearing that his client was being held at the Sokoto Correctional Centre, making the request for transfer from DSS custody to Kuje prison irrelevant.
The court further held that Kanu had previously indicated a preference for prison custody, and that his prayers had been overtaken by events following his conviction and lawful remand.
The appeal challenged the July 3 judgment of retired Federal High Court Judge, Justice Taiwo Taiwo, who dismissed Kanu’s fundamental rights enforcement suit for lack of proof. The respondents in the suit were the Director-General of the DSS, the DSS and the AGF.
In the original suit filed in December 2021 and marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1585/2021, Kanu alleged that his health deteriorated while in DSS custody and claimed that the medical personnel attending to him were unqualified.
However, DSS counsel, Idowu Awo, countered that the applicant failed to present any evidence showing that the medical staff were “quacks.” The AGF’s counsel, Simon Enoch, also urged the court to dismiss the application.
In its judgment, the trial court held that Kanu failed to provide credible evidence of torture, denial of religious freedom or inadequate medical care. Justice Taiwo ruled that while detainees have the right to practise their religion, such practice must not infringe on the rights or peace of others in custody.
On the allegation of inadequate medical attention, the court held that Kanu failed to call any medical expert to substantiate the claim.
Consequently, the Federal High Court dismissed the suit for lack of merit — a decision that has now been upheld and affirmed by the Court of Appeal.