Nnamdi Kanu Seeks Transfer from Sokoto Prison to Facilitate Appeal Process

Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) recently sentenced to life imprisonment, has submitted a new motion to the Federal High Court in Abuja requesting a transfer from Sokoto Correctional Facility. He contends that his current detention location severely restricts his ability to effectively pursue an appeal against his conviction.

Challenges of Detention Far from Abuja

In a motion filed ex parte and personally signed by Kanu, he highlights that being held in Sokoto-over 700 kilometers from Abuja-creates significant obstacles in preparing and filing his appeal documents. Following his sentencing on November 20, the court ordered his detention in any Nigerian correctional center except Kuje, leading to his transfer to Sokoto on November 21.

Kanu emphasizes that the distance complicates direct communication with the registries of both the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal, both located in Abuja. Additionally, all his potential supporters, including family members, associates, and legal advisors, are based in the capital, making it nearly impossible for him to coordinate his defense and appeal efforts.

Request for Relocation to a More Accessible Facility

Given these difficulties, Kanu has petitioned the court to instruct the Nigerian Correctional Service or federal authorities to relocate him to a correctional center within Abuja’s jurisdiction. Alternatively, he suggests transfer to nearby facilities such as Suleja or Keffi Correctional Centres, which would enable him to exercise his constitutional right to appeal without undue hardship.

Court’s Response and Legal Representation Issues

When the motion was presented by Prince Emmanuel Kanu, Nnamdi Kanu’s younger brother, the presiding judge, Justice James Omotosho, declined to hear the application on Emmanuel’s behalf. The judge clarified that only a licensed legal practitioner is authorized to move such motions in court.

“This motion cannot be moved on behalf of the convict because you are not a legal practitioner,” Justice Omotosho stated, advising that Nnamdi Kanu should retain a lawyer or seek assistance from the Legal Aid Council. He further explained, “You cannot represent an individual when you are not a lawyer; representation is limited to corporate entities in such cases.”

Following this guidance, Emmanuel Kanu requested a new hearing date, and the court adjourned the matter until December 8.

Clarifications on Appeal Procedures and Misconceptions

Justice Omotosho also addressed misinformation circulating about the case, particularly claims from a former legal representative of Kanu suggesting that his detention location prevents the compilation of his appeal records. The judge refuted this, explaining that physical presence in court is not mandatory for preparing appeal documents, although a legal representative may be required to act on the convict’s behalf.

He underscored the distinction between the rights of a defendant and those of a convicted person, emphasizing that procedural rights differ once a conviction has been secured.

Context and Broader Implications

This case highlights ongoing challenges faced by inmates detained far from judicial centers, particularly in Nigeria where infrastructure and legal support can be limited. According to recent data from the Nigerian Correctional Service, over 70% of inmates face difficulties accessing timely legal counsel due to geographic and systemic constraints. Kanu’s situation underscores the importance of ensuring detainees’ rights to fair appeal processes are not compromised by logistical barriers.