*First thing first, let his lawyers bring him out from his hiding – Respondents
“If Nnamdi Kanu said to be missing not found anywhere since the so called troops invasion can now instruct his lawyers to file an objection in court for his IPOB to be delisted as terrorist group, then he is not missing. Both the lawyers and the bail sureties should first present him to the public. That I think is what judge that sees himself or herself as working in the national interest of Nigerian State should first tell the lawyers before even listening to this objection,” one of them said.
The purportedly missing leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, has challenged the court order proscribing his group and declaring it a terrorist group.
In a statement on Friday, Mr. Kanu’s lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor, said the motion challenging Wednesday’s court order was filed on Friday.
But those behind the sponsorship of the terrorist activities Kanu have currently tried to create an opportunity in the alleged invasion of troops of his home to say he has been missing since then. Although the Federal Government has reportedly said his bail sureties should be asked to bring him out from his missing status.
Respondents who spoke to The DEFENDER on the development agreed that first thing first should be for court to order lawyers and bail sureties of Kanu to produce him to the publicly from his missing status.
“If Nnamdi Kanu said to be missing not found anywhere since the so called troops invasion can now instruct his lawyers to file an objection in court for his IPOB to be delisted as terrorist group, then he is not missing. Both the lawyers and the bail sureties should first present him to the public. That I think is what judge that sees himself or herself as working in the national interest of Nigerian State should first tell the lawyers before even listening to this objection,” one of them said.
Filing his motion, dated September 21, Barrister Ejiofor argued that IPOB is a non-violent organisation; therefore the decision of the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court to issue an order, based on a motion made ex-parte, was illegal.
A motion ex-parte is a motion heard by the court without the presence of the other party/parties.
Premium Times reported the lawyer to have also added that his client, whose whereabouts has been unknown since the violent crisis in Abia started two weeks ago, was not allowed fair hearing and that the court lacked the jurisdiction to grant such an order.
