A lawyer from the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON), Demdoo Asan, on Tuesday, withdrew his appearance from a matter brought to the Federal High Court in Abuja by the convicted leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.
Asan told Justice James Omotosho that he sought to withdraw from the case following Kanu’s alleged insistence to dictate to the council on how his motion ex-parte filed before the judge should be taken.
Justice Omotosho also struck out the motion ex-parte for being incompetent.
Kanu, who was convicted on terrorism offences, had sought “an order compelling the complainant (Federal Government) and/or the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS) to forthwith transfer him from the Sokoto Correctional Facility to a custodial facility within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.”
Kanu also sought an order transferring him to the court’s “immediate environs, such as the Suleja or the Keffi Custodial Centre, for the purpose of enabling the applicant (Kanu) to effectively prosecute his constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal.”
Justice Omotosho had, on December 8, 2025, held that Kanu’s application, moved by Asan cannot be granted through ex-parte motion, but through a motion on notice.
The judge held that the respondents – the federal government and NCoS – ought to be put on notice for them to respond appropriately in the interest of justice, before the request could be granted.
When the matter was called, the judge asked the registrar to confirm the service of the process and hearing notice on the respondents (FG and NCos).
The registrar told the court that there was no proof of service of the motion on notice and hearing notice on the respondents.
Asan, who appeared for Kanu, said though the court gave a directive on the last adjourned date, he had only been in touch with Kanu’s relatives through telephone calls.
“My lord that has been the reason counsel could not file the motion on notice because counsel cannot depose to that affidavit personally,” he said.
Nnamdi Kanu granted Honorary US Citizenship, named Georgia Goodwill ambassador
The lawyer added the second reason was that Kanu had sought to dictate to him on what to do.
He said: “My lord, another reason counsel has before this court today is the applicant (Kanu) wants to dictate the tone of counsel in this matter.
“The applicant wants to give counsel a right up of what to say in the matter before the court.
“My lord, the applicant (Kanu) has not given counsel a free hand to take on this matter as a counsel before the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
“My Lord, the applicant wants to control the pace of the matter and counsel from the custodial centre in Sokoto; counsel has also taken that up with the counsel and discussed with the directors.”
Asan, who invoked Order 50, Rule 1 of the Federal High Court Rules, therefore, sought the permission of the court to withdraw his appearance from Kanu’s matter.
Justice Omotosho, therefore, granted the lawyer and the council the permission to withdraw from representing Kanu.
The judge, thereafter, asked Asan who filed the ex-parte motion and the lawyer said it was Kanu himself, adding that the LACON had not filed any application before the court.
- VIDEO: Tinubu falls at official reception in Turkey - January 27, 2026
- Tinubu sends 24 health sector bills to Senate - January 27, 2026
- Lawyer withdraws from Nnamdi Kanu’s case - January 27, 2026
