Court strikes out Nnamdi Kanu’s application seeking transfer from Sokoto Prison

Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has struck out an ex-parte motion filed by the convicted leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, seeking his transfer from the Sokoto Correctional Facility.

At Tuesday’s proceedings, Kanu’s legal representative, Demdoo Asan, a senior legal officer with the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria, informed the court of his intention to withdraw from the case, citing irreconcilable differences with the applicant.

Asan told the court that since the last adjourned date, he had maintained constant communication with Kanu’s relatives, who were expected to depose to the application.

However, he said the relatives repeatedly failed to honour invitations to appear at the Legal Aid office, despite several assurances.

He further disclosed that Kanu sought to dictate the conduct of the case and control what counsel would say in court.

“He wants to write down what I would say while in court. But as an officer of the court, I cannot in good faith accept that,” Asan said.

He added that after consulting with his superiors at the Legal Aid Council, they unanimously shared the same position.

“As officers of the court, when a matter comes to us, we handle it as we deem professionally appropriate; otherwise, the applicant is free to seek legal representation elsewhere,” he stated.

Asan subsequently invoked Order 50, Rule 1 of the Federal High Court Rules, formally applying to withdraw from the matter.

In his ruling, Justice Omotosho commended the counsel for upholding the integrity and dignity of the court and granted leave for Asan and the Legal Aid Council to withdraw from representing the applicant.

The judge further held that the ex-parte motion before the court was incompetent. He noted that, in the interest of justice and fairness, all relevant parties ought to have been properly served.

Justice Omotosho observed that since the last court sitting on December 8, 2025, there was no proof of service before the court.

Consequently, the judge ordered that the application be struck out for lack of competence.