Senator Ifeanyi Uba, a member of the National Assembly representing Anambra North senatorial district, asked a Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday for an order allowing him to visit Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, who is currently in the custody of the Department of State Service, DSS.
Following the claimed reluctance of DSS authorities to allow him access to the arrested Biafran leader, Uba sought a court injunction.
A motion on notice to that effect was filed in accordance with section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, and under the court’s inherent jurisdiction as preserved by section 6(6)(b) of the same Constitution.
The plaintiff (Uba), among others, requests that the court allow him access to see the defendant, Nnamdi Kanu, in DSS detention, as part of his oversight legislative responsibility in the motion marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2021.
“An order of this Honourable Court instructing the Complainant and/or the Department of State Services (DSS) to grant Senator Dr. Ifeanyi Uba entry to their detention facility for the purpose of visiting the Defendant, Nnamdi Kanu.”
Senator Uba noted in an affidavit that “there had been substantial agitation aimed at pressing home his release and this had deteriorated into declaration of Sit-At-Home orders in the South East; a scenario which is harming the economy of the South East.”
“That I am aware that the Sit-At-Home orders are a means of expressing solidarity with the detained Defendant, and that they have been hijacked by unknown criminal elements who are now terrorizing the South East and carrying out wanton killings, assassinations, and the burning of valuable properties.”
“That I say that the Sit-At-Home directives have severely harmed the South East’s economy and have frequently resulted in the murdering of flouters, arson, and assassination of famous individuals by a terror group known as mysterious gunmen.”
“That there is an allegation that all of the aforementioned criminalities are being championed by the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra under the leadership of the incarcerated Defendant; an allegation that has been refuted multiple times; and yet the situation continues to deteriorate.”
“That as a senator from Nigeria’s South East Geo-Political Zone, I took it upon myself to visit the Defendant at the DSS detention facility to ascertain from him if he is involved in any way in what is happening in the South East and to seek a way of amicable settlement of the separatist agitation in the South East in the overall interest of Nigeria.”
“At the DSS detention facility, I was denied access to the Defendant and told to come to this court to get authorization before I could see him.”
“That I declare that the DSS’s refusal to allow me to visit and amicably intervene and provide answers to the ongoing Sit-At-Home orders, securities difficulties, and violence in the South East is a disservice to the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
“That I visited and intend to visit the Defendant in my role as a senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, with the purpose of attempting to alleviate and construct a meeting place or build a discussion table targeted at decreasing tension and quelling agitation and deaths in the South East.”
“That the visit is part of my oversight legislative responsibility, which I am empowered to do under the Nigerian Constitution.”
The document claimed, “That I state that my motivation in asking to see the defendant is in the interest of national peace and security.”
There is no set date for the motion to be decided.