Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.
Contempt proceedings against the Federal Government for flouting a court order, was on Monday commenced by Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPoB).
Kanu through Aloy Ejimakor, his lawyer, filed Form 49 titled, “Notice to Show Cause Why An Order Of Committal Should Not Be Made”, before the Abuja Federal High Court on Monday.
Respondents in the suit, are the Federal Government and Yusuf Bichi, Director-General of the Department of States Services (DSS).
Kanu is standing trial on a seven-count charge bordering on treasonable felony, preferred against him by the Federal Government.
Binta Nyako, presiding judge, on May 20, dismissed another bail application filed by Kanu.
Nyako also refused Kanu’s plea to be transferred from the custody of the DSS to prison.
The defendant’s request to be placed under house arrest was also rejected.
However, the court ordered the DSS to always grant Kanu access to his lawyers; not exceeding five persons on every visiting day.
The court ordered that Kanu must be given “a clean place” to consult with his lawyers at the DSS detention facility, adding that he must be granted access to a doctor of his choice.
However, Ejimakor has accused the DSS of refusing to obey the court order.
Read the court process: “On every visitation made to the applicant at the State Security Services detention facility (headquarters, Abuja) after the issuance and service of the said order and Form 48 thereof, you have not allowed applicant’s counsel to go in with writing materials to take notes of their discussions (between the applicant and his lawyers) relating to the preparation of the applicant for his defence.
“You have not complied with the 3 (three) days per week visitation to the applicant as was ordered by the court.
“You have not provided a safe and “clean” room to the applicant at the present facility to prepare for his defence with his team of counsels.
“You have not allowed such facility that is required for the preparation of the applicant’s defence, which facility you have disallowed on every visitation since the said order was entered”.
Ejimakor further stated that the DSS had also refused to allow “interdiction, seizure, perusal and photocopying of legal documents relating to the trial preparation of the applicant”.
Stated he: “Refusing certain visitors to the applicant, including those that are applicant’s potential witnesses and/or who possess information critical to the adequate preparation of the applicant’s defence to the criminal charges pending against him, particularly as it pertains to cross-examination of prosecution witnesses and authentication/impeachment of prosecution’s documentary evidence”.
The court is yet to fix a date for hearing.
