The detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, who was recently convicted and handed a life sentence, has submitted a fresh request to the Federal High Court in Abuja, explaining why he should not remain in the Sokoto Correctional Centre.
In a motion ex parte personally signed by him, Kanu argued that being kept in the Sokoto facility would make it extremely difficult for him to properly file and pursue an appeal against his conviction and sentence.
His younger brother, Prince Emmanuel Kanu, presented the application to the court on Thursday.
Kanu informed the court that since he could not be physically present to argue the motion himself, the judge should hear it in his absence.
In the application—filed under suit number FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015—Kanu noted that he was sentenced on November 20 after being found guilty on seven terrorism-related charges brought by the Federal Government. The court subsequently ordered that he be held in any correctional centre except the Kuje facility.
According to him:
On November 21, 2025, he was moved to the Sokoto Correctional Facility, located more than 700 km from Abuja.
He currently has no legal representation and intends to personally file his appeal.
Preparing the notice and record of appeal requires direct access to the court registries in Abuja.
All individuals who could support his appeal process—family members, associates, and legal advisers—are based in Abuja.
Kanu argued that keeping him in Sokoto makes it practically impossible to exercise his constitutional right to appeal, placing him under undue hardship and violating his rights under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.
He therefore asked the court to order the Federal Government or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) to immediately move him to a facility within Abuja’s jurisdiction, or at least to a nearby centre such as Suleja or Keffi, to enable him to effectively pursue his appeal.
Court Rejects Kanu’s Brother’s Attempt to Move the Motion
When the motion was called, Justice James Omotosho refused to hear Emmanuel Kanu, noting that he is not a lawyer and therefore cannot argue on behalf of the convict.
The judge emphasized that only a qualified legal practitioner can represent an individual in court, advising Kanu to hire a lawyer or seek help from the Legal Aid Council.
He stated:
Representation must come from a counsel, not a family member.
A non-lawyer cannot move such an application.
The judge then adjourned the matter to December 8 for hearing.
Judge Warns Against Public Misrepresentation of Kanu’s Case
Justice Omotosho also cautioned against spreading misleading claims about Kanu’s legal situation. He referred to comments by Kanu’s former lawyer and later consultant, Aloy Ejimakor, who suggested that Kanu’s location prevents him from compiling his appeal record.
The judge clarified that a convict does not need to be physically present in court to compile appeal records, although a representative may appear.
He stressed that a defendant’s rights differ from those of a convict.
About The Author
