Nnamdi Kanu: Court Rules On Notice To Give Oral Evidence

The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Monday, adjourned till March 16 to rule on a motion on notice filed by Maxwell Opara Esq, which wants the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu and the DG of the Department of States Services, to give oral evidence about the detained IPOB’s leader medical record or condition.

Maxwell Opara had filed a fundamental right application on Kanu’s behalf, alleging that his health is deteriorating in the DSS custody.

The DG, DSS and the Federal Ministry of Justice are the first to third respondents in the case.

Opara argued before Justice Taiwo Taiwo that there are contradictions in the counter affidavit filed by the DSS and that was why he is praying the judge to call Nnamdi Kanu and the DG, DSS to come and give oral evidence.

He argued that quack doctors have been attending to Kanu since his extradition to Nigeria, contrary to his fundamental right.

“Allow the parties to call oral evidence in this matter, the applicant complained that a quack doctor from DSS have taken his blood 20 times without bringing forth any medical report.

“What we are here is whether Kanu’s right has been violated by the DSS, ” he said while accusing the DSS of not filing a medical record or report on his client in their processes.RELATEDNIGERIA

IPOB Claims Gov Uzodinma Shared Smartphones, Cash To Entice Youths Against IPOBMar 2, 2022

But I.Awo, counsel for first and second respondent, DG, Department of States Services, DSS contended that while the judge has powers to call oral evidence of parties, Opara had not shown how the doctors attending to Kanu were doing “quack” jobs.

He argued that merely stating that the medical doctors the DSS assigned to attend to Kanu are quacks does not amount to conflict.

“It is important to note that the applicant has not denied the above assertion by the respondents neither has he shown by material particulars that the listed medical practitioners are quacks. The onus lies on the applicant via a further affidavit,” he stated in his counter affidavit.

He urged the judge to discountenance the application.

“We humbly urge that the application be thrown away and let us go into the substance of the case(Fundamental rights suit),” he said.

Simon Enoch, who represented Federal Ministry of Justice, also aligned with the argument of the DSS counsel.

“There is no material conflict in the affidavit of fact submitted before the court, ” he said

Justice Taiwo fixed 16th of March for ruling.