By NewsBits
The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has slammed a N100 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Federal Government of Nigeria led by President Muhammadu Buhari over his continued detention in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS).
Kanu said he filed the suit following the continued grandstanding of the Federal Government to implement the orders/judgment of the Court of Appeal, delivered on October 13, which in effect, discharged him of the frivolous charge brought against him by the Federal Government. The appellate court had in its judgment, further prohibited the Federal Government from further detaining Kanu, and/or subjecting him to further trial or prosecution by any court in Nigeria.
The fundamental rights enforcement suit filed at the Federal High Court Abuja is seeking the immediate release from the unlawful facility of the Department of State Services and payment of the sum of N100 billion reparation for the gross violation of his rights to liberty and dignity of human persons. The originating court process, filed by Chief (Dr.) Mike Ozekhome (SAN) on behalf of Kanu, dated October 21, 2022, is marked in FHC/ABJ/ CS/1945/2022.
By the suit, Kanu wants a declaration that his continued detention by the Federal Government from the 13th day of October 2022 till date, is illegal, unlawful, oppressive, unconscionable, and unconstitutional as it violates his fundamental rights to dignity of human person, 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.
More so, the applicant is seeking an order directing the respondents to unconditionally release him from their custody forthwith. Kanu is also praying for an order restraining the respondents, their agents, privies, assigns or howsoever called, from further interfering with his rights, and/or dealing with him in a manner inimical to his fundamental rights guaranteed by the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) 2011.
In addition, he is seeking a compensatory and exemplary damages of N100 billion against the respondents for the gross violation of his fundamental rights to dignity of human person, personal liberty, and freedom of movement.
The applicant equally wants an order “directing the respondents to tender unreserved public apology to the applicant in two national dailies, and any other forms of reparation that the honourable court may deem fit to grant.”
Kanu predicated the suit 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 isentitled 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.
“The applicant 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.
“The continued and unlawful detention of the applicant, whose health is daily deteriorating, from the 13th day of October 2022, till date, violates the applicant’s fundamental rights to personal liberty, dignity of human person, and freedom of movement, and consequently, illegal, and unconstitutional.
“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.
“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.”
Kanu contended that he 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 public apology from the respondents for the gross violation of his rights to dignity of human person, personal liberty, and freedom.
