DSS Wins As Federal High Court Rules Against Nnamdi Kanu

While telling the court his health was deteriorating in custody, the IPOB leader also accused the secret police of giving him unqualified medical personnel.

Countering, DSS lawyer, Idowu Awo argued that Kanu’s lawyer had not shown how the doctors attending to his client were “quacks”.

He further argued that merely stating that the medical doctors his office assigned to attend to Kanu were quacks did not amount to conflict, adding that Opara had not shown any material evidence to prove that the listed medical practitioners were quacks.

Also AGF’s lawyer, Simon Enoch, corroborated Awo’s submission, praying the court to reject Opara’s application.

Delivering the judgment, Justice Taiwo held that Kanu had not provided sufficient evidence that his fundamental rights were infringed upon by the DSS.

While also stating that the Biafra activist has the right to practice his religion, Taiwo agreed with the position of the respondent (DSS) that a suspect in custody cannot be allowed to practise his religion in such a way that would disturb the peace of other suspects.

On the allegation that the IPOB leader was receiving inadequate treatments from DSS’ doctors whom he had referred to as quacks, Mr Taiwo said that “the applicant fails to lead evidence by calling a medical practitioner to convince the court that based on the medical report, the treatment giving to Kanu is inadequate.”

Consequently, the judge dismissed the suit for lacking in merit and substance.