The embattled leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu has slammed a N100 billion suit against the federal government over his continued detention.
The suit is pursuant to the preservation of his fundamental human rights.
The Appeal Court had in its judgment on October 13 discharged Kanu of the terrorism charges against him and consequently prohibited the Federal government from detaining him further or subjecting him to further trial or prosecution in Nigeria.
The government has however appealed the judgment at the Supreme Court and equally filed a motion for a stay of execution of the judgment.
But Kanu is demanding his immediate release from the unlawful facility of the Department of State Services (DSS), and payment of the sum of N100 billion as reparation for the gross violation of his Rights to Liberty and Dignity of Human Persons.
In the originating court process filed by his lead counsel, Prof. Mike Ozekhome (SAN) dated October 21, is seeking unconditional release from custody.
In Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1945/2022, Kanu maintained that his solitary confinement in DSS custody is in flagrant disobedience to the orders as contained in the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
The suit is supported by a six-paragraph affidavit, deposed to by Chimuanya Emenari, a lawyer in the law firm of Ifeanyi Ejiofor.
He is substantially seeking the following reliefs:
"A declaration that the continued detention of the Applicant by the Respondents, from the 13th day of October 2022 till date, is illegal, unlawful, oppressive, unconscionable, and unconstitutional as it violates the Applicant’s Fundamental Rights to Dignity of Human Persons, Personal Liberty and Right to Freedom of Movement as guaranteed by Sections 34, 35, 36, 39, and 41 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) 2011.
"An order of court directing the respondents to unconditionally release him from their custody forthwith.
"An order of injunction restraining the Respondents, their agents, privies, assigns or howsoever called, from further interfering with the Applicant’s rights, and/or dealing with the Applicant in a manner inimical to his Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) 2011.
"Compensatory and exemplary damages of N100 billion against the respondents for the gross violation of the Applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of a human person, personal liberty, and freedom of movement.
"An order of the court directing the Respondents to tender an unreserved public apology to him in two National Dailies, and any other forms of reparation that the Honourable Court may deem fit to grant.
"He predicated his case on the grounds that by virtue of Section 46(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) 2011, and Order 1 Rule 2(1) of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, any person who alleges that any of the provisions of Chapter 4 of the Constitution to which he is entitled to, has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any State in relation to him may apply to the High Court in the State for redress.
"That he is entitled to his Fundamental Rights to Dignity of Human Person, Personal Liberty and Freedom of Movement guaranteed by Sections 34, 35 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) 2011.
"That his continued and unlawful detention under his deteriorating health condition, from October 13, 2022, till date, violates Fundamental Rights to Personal Liberty, Dignity of Human Person, and Freedom of Movement, and consequently, illegal and unconstitutional.
"That the Court of Appeal held that the Applicant is prohibited from being detained, tried, or otherwise dealt with in Nigeria, for/or in respect of any offence allegedly committed by him before his extraordinary rendition to Nigeria, thus, the continued detention by the Respondents, is arbitrary and unlawful.
"It is his case that the respondents have no authority or justification whatsoever, to detain the Applicant in complete defiance and disregard to the positive Order of the Court of Appeal, discharging the Applicant and barring the Respondents from detaining and/or prosecuting him.
"The Respondents cannot exercise their power outside the provision of the law and judicial pronouncements, and thus, they are bound to comply with the Order of the Court of Appeal, which discharged the Applicant.
"The Applicant is constitutionally entitled under Section 35 subsection (6) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) 2011 to the payment of compensation and a public apology from the Respondents for the gross violation of his Rights to Dignity of Human Person, Personal Liberty, and Freedom."
0 Comment(s)
SPONSORED
HEADLINE
TRENDING