...“This ex parte motion cannot be taken on behalf of Kanu because you are not a legal practitioner,” the judge said.
ABUJA, NIGERIA – The iNews Times | The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday scheduled December 8 for the hearing of an ex parte motion filed by Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), seeking his transfer out of the Sokoto Correctional Facility.
Kanu was convicted on November 20, 2025, on all seven terrorism counts brought against him by the Federal Government and subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment.
After his conviction, he was moved to the Sokoto Correctional Facility following the court’s safety concerns, as it considered the Kuje Correctional Centre unsuitable due to past security breaches and prison breaks.
Prior to the judgement, Kanu had dismissed his legal team and chose to represent himself.
During Thursday’s proceedings, trial judge Justice James Omotosho scheduled the hearing date after refusing to recognise the appearance of Kanu’s younger brother, Emmanuel Kanu, who attempted to stand in for the IPOB leader despite not being a legal practitioner.
When the matter was called, Justice Omotosho requested appearances from counsel. Emmanuel, though not a lawyer, stood up and announced his appearance, prompting the judge’s refusal.
Justice Omotosho informed him that he could not move the application.
“This ex parte motion cannot be taken on behalf of Kanu because you are not a legal practitioner,” the judge said.
Reiterating that only a lawyer is permitted to move such an application, Justice Omotosho advised Emmanuel to either hire counsel or seek assistance from the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria.
“When I refer to representation, I do not mean his father, brother, sister, or any relative. I mean his counsel.
“I will not address the merits of this application at this stage in the interest of justice, but you cannot represent another individual in court if you are not a lawyer; only companies can be represented by non-lawyers.
“You cannot move this application because you are not a solicitor or an advocate of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
“To qualify as a lawyer would take you about six years or more. So, engage a counsel to move the application,” the judge told him.
When Emmanuel requested the next adjourned date, Justice Omotosho explained that despite having other matters scheduled for Monday, the court would make room for Kanu’s case.
“Thank you, sir,” Emmanuel replied.
The judge also warned against creating any public misunderstanding about the proper process for compiling Kanu’s record of appeal.
Justice Omotosho clarified that, contrary to comments made by one of Kanu’s former lawyers, now serving as a consultant Aloy Ejimakor, the convict’s presence in court was not necessary for the compilation of his record.
He stated: “Let me offer some general guidance so the process is not delayed. Regarding the appeal, I cannot pretend to be unaware of public discussions. Mr. Ejimakor granted an interview alleging that the defendant (Kanu) is being deprived of the chance to compile his record. That assertion is incorrect. A defendant does not need to be physically present to compile a record.
“His attendance is not required; only the appearance of his representative may be necessary. The rights of a defendant are not the same as the rights of a convict.”
Justice Omotosho then asked the lawyers in court whether Kanu’s presence was required for the compilation of the record, and they unanimously said no.
Justice Omotosho again advised Emmanuel to engage a competent lawyer, stressing that any counsel lacking proper knowledge of appellate procedure should refrain from misleading the public.
“It is time to set the record straight. Proper legal guidance is essential,” the judge said.
After declining to hear Emmanuel, the judge adjourned the matter to December 8 for the hearing of the pending application.
In the ex parte motion personally signed by him, Kanu requested an order allowing the application to be considered as moved in his absence, noting that it was impossible for him to appear in court or chambers to present it himself.
He also sought an order directing the Federal Government and/or the Nigerian Correctional Service to immediately relocate him from the Sokoto Correctional Facility to a custodial centre within the jurisdiction of the court.
In the alternative, he asked to be moved to a nearby facility such as the Suleja or Keffi Custodial Centre to enable him to properly pursue his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.
In the motion marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015 and supported by eight grounds, Kanu noted that he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment on November 20, and that the court ordered his detention in any correctional facility in Nigeria other than Kuje.
“On November 21, 2025, the applicant was moved to the Sokoto Correctional Facility, where he is currently detained more than 700 kilometres away from Abuja.
“The applicant, who presently has no legal representation, intends to personally pursue his constitutional right to appeal his conviction and sentence.
“Preparing the notice of appeal and the record of appeal requires his direct interaction with the Registry of this Honourable Court and the Court of Appeal in Abuja.”
The motion continued:
“All individuals essential to assisting the applicant with his appeal, including family members, associates, and legal consultants are located in Abuja.
“His continued detention in Sokoto makes the effective exercise of his constitutional right of appeal practically impossible, causing severe hardship and potentially undermining that right, contrary to Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).”
Kanu maintained that transferring him to a custodial facility closer to Abuja would serve the interest of justice and enable him to properly pursue his appeal.
