In his ruling yesterday, Justice Inyang Ekwo struck out the suit for lack of diligent prosecution.
When the case came up yesterday, neither Kanu nor the Federal Government was represented by any lawyer.
Ruling on the matter, Justice Ekwo observed that in the last adjourned day, while no lawyer was in court for the IPOB leader, the Federal Government was represented in court by a counsel.
Justice Ekwo said that the case had suffered three adjournments due to no representation and consequently struck it out.
In the suit with No: FHC/ABJ/CS/462/2022, Kanu had sued the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as 1st and 2nd defendants over allegations bordering on violation of his rights, alleged that he was kidnapped from Kenya and brought back to Nigeria to stand trial.
He wants the court to determine “whether the way and manner in which the plaintiff was abducted in Kenya and extraordinarily renditioned to Nigeria is consistent with extant laws.”
Specifically, he cited “the provisions of Article 12 (4) of the African Charter on human and peoples rights (ratification and enforcement) Act Cap A9 laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, and Article/Part 5 (a) of the African Charter’s principles and guidelines on human and peoples’ rights while countering terrorism in Africa.”
Kanu also wants the court to determine “whether by the operation of Section 15 of the Extradition Act Cap E25, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, the plaintiff can be competently/legally tried for offences stated in counts 1 to 14 of the 15-count amended charge.
He said the counts “are not the offences for which he was surrendered or extraordinarily renditioned to Nigeria.”
He is also seeking an order restraining the defendants from taking any further step to prosecute him over criminal charge no: FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, currently pending before a sister court presided over by Justice Binta Nyako.
Kanu also asked the court to award the sum of N100 million to him “as the cost of this action.”
But in a notice of preliminary objection dated June 6, 2022, but filed June 27, 2022, the Federal Government and AGF prayed the court to dismiss the suit, describing it as “an abuse of court process.”
Giving one ground of argument, the defendants argued that Kanu had filed an earlier suit with similar facts before a Federal High Court, Umuahia Division in suit number: FHC/UM/CS/30/2022.
They further argued that the two defendants were parties in the suit.
