Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, 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 of the Legal Aid Council, informed the court that he wished to withdraw from the matter, citing irreconcilable issues.
He explained that since the last adjourned date, he had been in constant phone communication with the relatives of the applicant.
However, the relatives did not show up at the Legal Aid office to depose to the application, despite phone calls and promises to appear.
Demdoo added that Kanu sought to dictate the proceedings 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 can’t in good faith accept that,” he said.
He further stated that after consulting with his superiors, they shared the same sentiment.
“As officers of the court, when a matter comes to us, we handle it as we see fit; otherwise, the applicant can find legal help elsewhere,” Demdoo said.
He then invoked Order 50, Rule 1 of the Federal High Court Rules, seeking to formally withdraw from the matter.
In his ruling, Justice Omotosho commended the counsel for upholding the dignity of the court.
He granted leave for Demdoo and the Legal Aid Council to withdraw from representing the defendant.
The judge added that the motion was incompetent. However, in the interest of justice and fairness, he directed that other parties involved be served with notice.
He noted that, since the last court sitting on December 8, 2025, there was no proof of service before the court.
Justice Omotosho thereafter ordered that the ex-parte motion be struck out for lacking competence.
Kanu, who was sentenced to life imprisonment on November 20, 2025, after being found guilty on seven counts of terrorism-related offences, had personally signed the motion seeking his transfer. He argued that his detention in Sokoto, over 700 kilometres from Abuja, would hamper his ability to effectively prosecute his appeal.
In the eight grounds supporting the application marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, Kanu stated that he was unrepresented by counsel and intended to personally exercise his constitutional right of appeal. He contended that preparing the notice and record of appeal required personal interaction with the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal registries in Abuja.
He further argued that his relatives, associates, and legal consultants were all based in Abuja and that his continued detention in Sokoto rendered his right of appeal impracticable, constituting exceptional hardship and a violation of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
Kanu consequently urged the court to compel the Federal Government or the Nigerian Correctional Service to transfer him to a custodial facility within Abuja or, alternatively, to nearby centres such as Suleja or Keffi, to enable him prosecute his appeal.
The court had earlier declined to hear the motion on December 4, 2025, after Kanu’s younger brother, Prince Emmanuel, attempted to move it despite not being a legal practitioner. This led to the appearance of the Legal Aid Council on December 8, when the matter was adjourned for hearing with orders for service on relevant parties.
However, following counsel’s withdrawal and the absence of proof of service, Justice Omotosho struck out the motion in its entirety.