Nnamdi Kanu Is Hungry, Starving In DSS Custody, Lawyer Cries Out
Ifeanyi Ejiofor, lawyer of the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has claimed that his client is starving in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS).
Kanu, who is standing trial for terrorism, had jumped bail in 2017 and fled abroad.
From his base, he had incited his followers and made provocative statements, which triggered violence and led to blood shed, according to security operatives.
However, he was rearrested in July and lawfully remanded in DSS custody, from where he has been taken to court.
Last week when his legal team lamented over his condition in custody, Justice Binta Nyako had responded that the DSS facility is not a 5-star hotel.
The judge had, however, asked the secret police to give Kanu maximum comfort in detention.
In a statement on Tuesday, Ejiofor claimed none of the pronouncements of Justice Nyako has been obeyed by the DSS.
“The routine visit to our client — Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was conducted on December 6, 2021, and in his usual practice, he extended his compliments to his millions of supporters. He remains profoundly grateful for the overwhelming support and show of solidarity thus far.
“However, we observed with dismay, and indeed very unfortunate and worrisome that notwithstanding the far-reaching orders made by Her Lordship in the open Court on December 2, 2021, the detaining authority being the DSS have in their usual style, flouted and/or ignored the said court orders.
“We were informed by our client – Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu that none of the pronouncements made by the Court on December 2 2021 has been obeyed by the DSS.
“They have unrepentantly continued to treat the orders of the Court with the greatest disdain. Our client — Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu further informed us that he had not eaten anything since yesterday (Sunday).”
He also claimed that his client is being punished because he complained to the court about how he is being treated in the custody.
“Apparently, he is being punished because we dared to complain to the court about the condition under which he is being held in custody. But, very, unfortunately, this should be the height of their reckless affront to the orders of Court.”
“At the time Her Lordship made these far-reaching orders in open court, I did not mince words in informing the Court that the operatives of the DSS will flout these orders, pursuant to which the court specifically told me to come back to her with these facts if her order is flouted.
“Interestingly, we will be approaching the court tomorrow with this terrifying development, which is totally unacceptable, grossly condemnable, and cannot be tolerated.
“The detaining authority (DSS) is an agency clearly established by instrumentality of the laws and should operate within the confines of the same laws establishing them, and should not be seen as a lawless entity.”
