In a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/ 2341/2022, Kanu through his legal team led by Mike Ozekhome SAN sued the DSS and its Director General and prayed the court for permission to apply for an order of mandamus.
The court had, on February 1, granted Kanu, the permission to apply for an order of mandamus he sought after an ex-parte motion moved by Ozekhome to the effect.
But in a preliminary objection, the DSS urged the court to dismiss the suit for want of jurisdiction.
Upon resumed hearing in the matter, counsel for Kanu, Ozekhome SAN told the court that the motion dated February 2, was served on the respondents on February 3 to allow Kanu access to his doctor pursuant to an earlier order of the presiding judge, Justice Nyako.
He alleged that the order had been disregarded by the DSS adding that flouting the order for access was against Section 7 of the Anti-Torture Act.
He said two exhibits before the court detailed Kanu’s medical report before his rendition on June 27, 2021, and a medical report of his present health status.
“We asked if we could see his medical report and they are refusing and if he dies, this will cause national commotion.”
“What do they lose to allow an independent doctor to examine him in their presence,” he said.
“We rely on all the processes to humbly request you to grant our omnibus prayers,” he said.
He dismissed allegations that Kanu jumped bail on April 25, 2017, after the court granted him bail.
Contrary to the DSS’ argument that the matter was similar to the ruling before a sister court, Ozekhome argued that the subject matters and the parties in the two matters were different.
“We filed a counter of five paragraphs. In the instant case, there are two respondents, but in the suit they referred to, there were three respondents. So on the issue of parties, they failed.”
“On subject matter, this suit is seeking an order of judicial review by way of mandamus but in the other suit, it was filed for the enforcement of his fundamental rights and not judicial reviews.
“The former suit sought 11 reliefs but ours has two reliefs,” he said.
Furthermore, he said that the law allowed an aggrieved party to file more than one case where the facts of his case disclose multiple causes of action.
On his part, Danlami urged the court to dismiss Kanu’s plea for lack of jurisdiction, for the sake of justice and national interest.
The lawyer said, one of the exhibits revealed that Kanu was physically and clinically sound.
After taking arguments from both parties, Justice Binta Nyako adjourned the matter to July 20 for judgment.
