New details have surfaced regarding why the Department of State Services (DSS) continues to block lawyers from accessing Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), who is facing terrorism charges in the Federal High Court in Abuja. The ongoing situation raises significant concerns about legal rights and access to counsel in high-profile cases.
According to reports, Kanu has been in detention since June 2021, following his contentious repatriation from Kenya. His legal team has frequently claimed that the DSS is deliberately restricting their access to him, which has prompted various legal challenges and court orders. On October 17, the court issued a warning to DSS Director-General Adeola Ajayi, threatening potential jail time if this denial persisted, underscoring the serious nature of the issue. This action has put additional pressure on the DSS to comply with judicial directives.[/p>
In a subsequent hearing, the court ordered the DSS Director-General to appear and explain the ongoing restrictions on Kanu’s access to his lawyers. This restriction is reportedly based on directives from the SSS leadership, complicating the legal proceedings surrounding Kanu's case. Judge Binta Nyako had previously mandated on May 20 that the IPOB leader be allowed visitors three days a week—specifically on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. This court order specified that Nnamdi Kanu must be provided with a secure and clean room to meet with up to five counsel members, allowing them to prepare his defense adequately.
A court document, obtained by Premium Times, detailed the requirements for the legal team’s access to him, allowing them adequate space and the ability to take notes as needed during their visits. However, unnamed DSS officials have contended that the court order only grants access to Kanu for trial preparation, which they claim is currently on hold. This interpretation of the court's directive has raised eyebrows among legal observers and Kanu's supporters alike, as it could hinder the defendant's right to prepare for his trial effectively.
According to one source familiar with the case, Nnamdi Kanu’s demand for Justice Nyako’s recusal had temporarily disrupted the court proceedings. Although Justice Nyako has since resumed handling the case, no date has been set to restart the trial. This uncertainty has led the DSS to assert that access to Kanu is only warranted once the trial is officially back underway, which many believe is an unreasonable limitation on his legal rights.
Kanu’s lawyer, Nnaemeka Ejiofor, criticized the DSS’s stance, labeling it “childish.” He stated, “It’s so childish in the sense that an order of the court does not ordinarily elapse unless it is set aside by another order of court.” Ejiofor contended that the DSS lacks the authority to limit visitation when a court order is in place, emphasizing that such restrictions could undermine the legal process. He added, “If they are saying we cannot see him until the trial has started, is it when the trial resumes that we then start preparing our client (Kanu) for trial?” This statement highlights the critical need for continued legal access during the interim period before the trial resumes.
Furthermore, Ejiofor argued that if the DSS claims the court order allowing legal access expired with Justice Nyako’s temporary recusal, then Kanu’s detention should also be considered invalid. “It, therefore, means that Nnamdi Kanu has no business being in SSS detention. It also means that his further detention at the SSS facility is illegal because the order has expired according to the SSS,” he asserted. This argument could have significant implications for the legality of Kanu's continued detention and raises broader questions about the enforcement of court orders by security agencies in Nigeria.