The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Friday, struck out a suit the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu, filed to challenge the conduct of his trial in secret.

Kanu, who is facing a terrorism charge the Federal Government preferred against him, had in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/ CS/550/2022, queried the legality of a new practice direction that was signed by the Chief Judge of the High Court, Justice John Tsoho.

He contended that the said practice direction was illegal, and unconstitutional and ought to be declared null and void.

The IPOB leader prayed the court to declare that the provisions of Order III of the Federal High Court Practice Directions (On Trial of Terrorism Cases) 2022, were already the subject of Section 36 (4)(a) and (b) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, and therefore otiose, inoperative and outrightly ultra vires.

Cited as Defendants in the suit were the CJ and the Chief Registrar of the Court.

Justice Tsoho had issued the contentious practice direction in the exercise of his constitutional powers as enshrined in Section 254 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

According to the new direction, proceedings in terrorism cases would be held on camera or as may be ordered by the trial judge.


“Proceedings of offences of terrorism, subject to the provisions of section 232 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 and section 34 of the Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011 (as amended), shall be held in camera or as may be ordered by the Court.

“The names, addresses, telephone numbers and identity of the victims of such offences or witnesses in the proceedings shall not be disclosed in any record or report of the proceedings and it shall be sufficient to designate the names of the victims or witnesses with a combination of alphabets.

“In any proceedings where the Court deems it necessary to ensure the safety and/or protect the identity of the victim or a witness, it may take any or all of the following protective measures:

“Hold its proceedings at any place to be designated by the Chief Judge and in the case of the Abuja Judicial Division, the venue for the time being, shall be the premises of the Code of Conduct Tribunal;

“Receive evidence by video link; Permit the witness to be screened or masked; Receive written depositions of expert witnesses; Direct that all or any part of the proceedings of the Court shall not be published in any manner;

“Exclude from the proceedings any person other than the parties and their legal representatives;

“Make order as to any electronic devices that would be allowed during the proceeding

“Make an order on any other measure that the Court considers appropriate in the circumstances”, the direction read.

However, Kanu, in the suit he filed through his lawyer, Mr Ifeanyi Ejiofor, among other things, sought an order of perpetual injunction, restraining the defendants, whether by themselves, servants, agents, privies, and all other officers and agents of the Federal High Court of Nigeria from applying and enforcing the provisions of the Federal High Court Practice Directions (On Trial of Terrorism Cases) 2022.

Meanwhile, at the resumed proceedings in the matter on Friday, Kanu’s lawyer, Ejiofor, applied to withdraw the suit.

Following his application, Justice Inyang Ekwo struck out the matter.

Speaking with newsmen after the proceedings, Ejiofor, said his client decided to withdraw the suit, having realised that he was not the target of the said practice direction.

Meantime, the court, on Friday, fixed December 14 to hear another suit that Kanu filed to challenge his alleged forceful and extraordinary rendition from Kenya by the federal government.