October 29, (THEWILL) – Ifeanyi Ejiofor, the lead counsel for Nnamdi Kanu, the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has alleged that the Department of State Services (DSS) denied a former Anambra state governor, Chukwuemeka Ezeife, and a British envoy access to his client.
Kanu, who is facing charges of treason, is currently being held by the DSS after he was brought back to Nigeria to face trial.
In July, Justice Binta Nyako ruled that access to Kanu at the DSS should be “regimented”.
“But it is not going to be all comers’ affair; it will be regimented. You can’t get up at night and say you want to visit your client,” the judge had said.
However, Ejiofor, who failed to disclose the name of the envoy, described the action of the DSS as a “clear violation of the subsisting order of court”, adding that he will initiate legal action against the leadership of the DSS.
The lawyer said the DSS had earlier denied Bruce Fein, IPOB’s lawyer in the US, access to Kanu when he visited on Monday.
The statement reads: “Today was the turn of the British consul to experience what the civilized society may refer to as the height of abnormality in the system.
“The innocent woman who flew all the way from Lagos on this special diplomatic engagement, was denied access to our client and told her that she is not welcome for the visit because she’s a foreigner.
“His Excellency, Dr. Chukwuemeka Ezeife who was denied access to the courtroom at the last court sitting was also denied access to our client today without offering any reason(s). Height of impunity indeed!
“It is important to point out here that the order of court with regard to the number of persons and class of persons allowed to visit our client, never restricted them to Nigerians only
“It is more so that this clarification was made by His Lordship, following our specific complaint to the court that Attorney Bruce Fein was not only denied access to our client on two occasions at the DSS Headquarters, but was not allowed inside the courtroom on 21st October, 2021.
“If His Lordship’s intention was to restrict foreigners from visiting our Client, the Court would have simply made it clear while responding to our application for clarification.
“Though we have promptly filed another application for the transfer of our client to the correctional center predicated on an entirely new set of facts.
“It is now crystal clear to the world that if the DSS is allowed to remain the custodian of our client, there shall certainly be gross denial of fair hearing and fair trial in these proceedings.
“We will equally be initiating contempt proceedings against the Head of the DSS for this gross violation of court order.
“Order of the court must be obeyed regardless of the status of the person(s) involved or the agency affected by the order.
“Even though the DSS has a history of flouting court orders with impunity, we will pursue for the Court to step in, in this case and protect the sanctity of its Order(s). Enough is enough!”
About the Author
