The imprisoned leader of the banned Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has filed a contempt charge against Yusuf Bichi, Director General of the State Security Services (SSS), for allegedly failing to comply with court orders.
Kanu, through his lawyer Aloy Ejimakor, submitted Form 49, titled “Notice to show cause why an order of committal should not be made,” at the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday.
The application, identified as FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, was dated and filed on June 10. The Federal Republic of Nigeria is listed as the complainant and first respondent, while Yusuf Magaji Bichi is the second respondent and alleged contemnor.
Kanu claims that despite being served with the May 20 orders from Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja, Bichi has refused to comply.
On May 20, Justice Nyako declined Kanu’s request to set aside the revocation of his 2017 bail, following allegations that he had jumped bail. The judge also denied his request to be transferred to Kuje Correctional Centre or placed under house arrest.
However, Justice Nyako did amend the visitation conditions for Kanu’s lawyers at the SSS facility, increasing the allowed visitation days from two to three per week.
The judge ordered that Mr Kanu should be given a safe and “clean” room to prepare for his defence with his team of counsel not exceeding five in number, instead of three lawyers that was formerly directed.
She also ordered that Mr Kanu and his lawyers should be allowed such a facility required for the preparation of his defence and be allowed to take notes.
However, in the application, Mr Kanu alleged that the SSS DG had failed to abide by the orders.
The charge read in part: “Take notice that the defendant will on the ____day of _______, 2024, at the hour of 9 o’clock in the forenoon apply to this court for an order for your committal to prison for having disobeyed the order of this court made on the 20th day of May 2024, which stated in pertinent part as follows: 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 counsel. 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, as set out below: “Interdiction, seizure, perusal and photocopying of legal documents relating to the trial preparation of the Applicant.
“By not retracing your steps after you were, on the 31st day of May 2024, served with a Form 48; notice of consequences of disobedience to court. And take further notice that you are hereby required to attend the court on the first-mentioned day to show cause why an order for your committal should not be made.”
Leave a Reply