A Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out a motion by Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), seeking his transfer from Sokoto Correctional Facility.
Kanu, who was remanded in Sokoto Prison following his conviction on a seven-count terrorism-related charge by the Federal High Court on November 20, 2025, had filed an ex parte motion requesting “an order compelling the complainant (federal government) and/or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) to forthwith transfer him from Sokoto Correctional Facility to a custodial facility within the jurisdiction of this honourable court.”
He alternatively sought to be transferred to the court’s immediate environs, including Suleja or Keffi Custodial Centres, to enable him effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.
However, the court had earlier ruled that the application could not be brought ex parte and ordered that the respondents, including the federal government and NCoS, be served with a motion on notice to respond in the interest of justice.
At the resumed hearing on Tuesday, Demdoo Asan, a senior legal officer of the Legal Aid Council representing Kanu, informed the court of his decision to withdraw from the case, citing irreconcilable issues.
He told the court: “Since the last adjourned date, I have been on constant phone communication with the relatives of the applicant. However, the relatives did not show up at our office to depose to the application despite phone calls and promises to appear.
“Also, the applicant wants to dictate the tune of the matter; he wants to control what counsel would say and write down what I would say while in court. As an officer of the court, I cannot, in good faith, accept that.”
Demdoo said he consulted with his superiors who shared the same sentiments and subsequently sought to withdraw as counsel for Kanu.
James Omotosho, the presiding judge, commended the counsel for upholding the dignity of the court and granted leave for the Legal Aid Council to withdraw from representing Kanu.
He added: “To the application itself, the motion was incompetent. However, in the interest of justice and fairness, this court directed that other parties involved in the matter be served on notice. But, since the last court sitting on December 8, 2025, until today, January 27, there is no proof of service before this court. The motion ex parte is struck out for lacking competence.”
