A Federal Excessive Courtroom in Abuja has fastened additional listening to for March 4 in a recent N1billion swimsuit filed by the detained chief of the proscribed Indigenous Individuals of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu towards the Federal Authorities and three others.
The others are the Lawyer Common of the Federation (AGF), the Division of State Providers (DSS) and its Director Common.
Justice James Omotosho rescheduled listening to within the basic rights enforcement swimsuit on Monday owing to the absence of the applicant’s lawyer.
On the point out of the case, no lawyer introduced look for the applicant, whereas the respondents had been represented by two legal professionals – Enoch Simon (for the Fed Govt and the AGF) and I. Awo for the DSS.
Simon knowledgeable the court docket that his shoppers had been solely served with the listening to discover and haven’t been served with the swimsuit’s originating processes.
He mentioned he got here to court docket out of respect for the court docket.
Awo, who spoke in comparable method, mentioned “We weren’t served as nicely.”
Upon listening to the legal professionals, Justice Omotosho adjourned until March 4 for listening to and ordered {that a} listening to discover be issued and served on the applicant.
Within the swimsuit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1633/2023 filed for Kanu by his lawyer, Aloy Ejimakor, he’s looking for a declaration that the respondents’ act of forcible seizure and photocopying of confidential authorized paperwork pertaining to facilitating the preparation of his defence which had been dropped at him on the respondents’ detention facility by his legal professionals, amounted to denial of his rights to be defended by authorized practitioners of his personal alternative.
Different reliefs being sought embody:
– A declaration that the respondents’ act of refusing or stopping his counsel from taking notes of particulars of counsel’s skilled discussions/consultations with him at DSS detention, with mentioned discussions/consultations regarding preparation of his protection, amounted to denial of his proper to be given ample amenities for the preparation of his defence by authorized practitioners of his personal alternative.
– A declaration that the respondents’ act of eavesdropping on his confidential consultations/conversations along with his legal professionals on issues regarding preparation of his defence through the legal professionals’ visitations amounted to denial of applicant’s proper to be given ample amenities for the preparation of his defence and to be.defended by authorized practitioners of his personal alternative.
– An order of injunction restraining and prohibiting the respondents from their act of refusing or stopping the applicant’s counsel from taking notes of particulars of counsel’s skilled discussions/consultations with the applicant through the counsel’s visitation with the applicant on the premises of respondents’ detention facility.
– An order of injunction restraining and prohibiting the respondents from their act of eavesdropping on the applicant’s confidential consultations/conversations along with his legal professionals on issues regarding preparation of applicant’s defence through the legal professionals’ visitations with the applicant on the detention facility.
– An order compelling the respondents to situation an official letter of apology to him for the infringement of his basic proper to truthful listening to.
– An order mandating the respondents to collectively and severally pay the sum of N1 billion as damages for the psychological, emotional, psychological and different damages he suffered because of the his rights’ breach.