 |
| Nnamdi Kanu’s |
The Federal High Court in Abuja has stepped back from hearing Nnamdi Kanu’s request to be moved from the Sokoto correctional facility. The judge made it clear that the court will not look into the matter until a qualified lawyer appears for him. This decision came after his younger brother, Prince Emmanuel Kanu, tried to speak for him in court.
The case drew attention because of the unusual way it unfolded. Kanu, who is the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has been in custody since his conviction on terrorism charges. He is serving a life sentence after the court delivered its judgment on November 20, 2025. Not long after the sentencing, he filed an application asking to be transferred to a location closer to Abuja. He said the distance between Abuja and Sokoto makes it difficult for him to work on his appeal.
When the matter came up for hearing, Kanu was not present. Instead, his brother showed up and attempted to speak for him. But the judge stopped him right away. He told him that the court cannot accept a relative speaking in place of a convicted person. Only a lawyer who is licensed to practice in Nigeria can do that. This decision shaped the entire session and forced the court to shift the matter to a future date.
The judge did not only reject the attempt. He took time to explain why. He told the court that the law does not allow anyone without legal training to argue motions. Even though Emmanuel said he was representing his brother with his full consent, the judge made it clear that consent does not replace a law license. He advised Emmanuel to engage a lawyer or seek help from the Legal Aid Council, which is allowed to represent people who cannot afford a lawyer.
The courtroom was calm but tense. Emmanuel tried to explain that he came because his brother needed urgent help. He stressed that the conditions of Kanu’s detention and the long distance between Sokoto and Abuja were making it almost impossible for him to participate in his own appeal process. But the judge did not shift ground. He said the court cannot bend the rules for any individual, no matter the situation.
Why Kanu Filed the Transfer Request
In his written request, Kanu said that staying in Sokoto puts him at a disadvantage. Sokoto is more than 700 kilometres from Abuja. That means long travel time, high cost, and heavy restrictions for anyone who wants to visit him. He argued that most of the people who support his legal team live in Abuja or nearby states. That includes relatives, friends, and associates who help with documents, discussions, and consultations.
He also said that the long distance affects his lawyers. Preparing an appeal is not a simple process. It involves meetings, paperwork, and clear communication between a convict and his legal team. Kanu said the location of the Sokoto facility disrupts all of that.
He asked the court to move him to any correctional centre within or around Abuja. He mentioned places like Suleja or Keffi, which are both within reach. His argument was simple: he needs to be closer to his lawyers and support system so he can properly prepare for his appeal.
What the Judge Said About Representation
The issue of representation became the main focus of the hearing. The judge repeated that the court cannot hear motions moved by unqualified persons. He said the court has no record of Emmanuel as a legal practitioner. Since he is not one, he cannot speak for his brother. The judge pointed out that it does not matter that the motion was filed ex parte or that it was signed by Kanu himself. Once the matter gets to court, only a lawyer can handle it.
The judge added that the court needs to maintain order and follow the law. If a court allows anyone to represent someone else, the entire legal system will lose structure. He said this is why the law draws a strict line. A person can appear for themselves, but no one can appear for another without a law license.
He also addressed claims that Kanu must be physically present before his appeal record can be prepared. He dismissed those claims as incorrect. He said the law allows lawyers to handle appeal processes even when the convict is not present in court. He described the contrary claim as “misleading” and said no one should confuse the public with wrong information.
The Legal Aid Option
The judge did not just dismiss the attempt. He made a suggestion. He told the family that if they cannot afford a lawyer or cannot reach one in time, they should go to the Legal Aid Council. The council is allowed by law to represent indigent persons, including convicts who need legal support. The judge made it clear that the council can help move the motion and ensure the case is heard properly.
This was important because it means Kanu does not have to be stuck. He has the right to legal representation, and the court is open to hearing his request, but only through the proper channel.
The New Hearing Date
After making these points, the judge adjourned the case. The new date is December 8, 2025. But he stressed that the court will only proceed if Kanu is represented by a licensed lawyer or by an official from the Legal Aid Council. If neither happens, the court will not hear the motion.
This means the responsibility now lies with Kanu and his legal advisers. They must take quick steps to secure proper representation before the next date.
Reactions in Court
People present in court noted that the session was calm but emotional. Emmanuel looked disappointed, but he did not argue with the judge. He thanked the court for the clarification before leaving the courtroom. Some supporters who came to observe the hearing whispered among themselves. They were disappointed that the case did not move forward, but they also appeared relieved that a new date was set.
What This Means for the Appeal Process
Kanu’s transfer request is about fairness. He wants to be closer to his lawyers so he can prepare his appeal properly. His conviction is a major case with national attention. Any difficulty he has in preparing his appeal could raise questions about the fairness of the process.
The court appears to understand the urgency of the matter. But it also insists on following the rules. This is the balance the judge tried to maintain: giving Kanu a fair chance while keeping the court system orderly.
If the transfer request is eventually granted, Kanu may be moved to a facility closer to Abuja. That would likely make his appeal process smoother. If the request is denied, he will remain in Sokoto, and his legal team will have to find ways to manage the long distance.
Conclusion
The court’s decision to defer the case was not based on the content of the request but on the person who tried to present it. The judge stood by the law and explained why representation must follow proper procedures. The door is still open for Kanu to pursue his request, but he must do so through the correct channel.
As it stands, the next step is clear. A lawyer must appear on December 8. Only then will the court take up the matter and decide whether Kanu should be moved from Sokoto to a facility closer to Abuja.
BY: SUNDAY UNEKWUOJO SAMSON