The fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu against the Department of State Services (DSS) has once again been dismissed by the Federal High Court in Abuja.

While delivering the ruling on the case marked FHC/ABJ/CS/482/2022 on Thursday, Justice James Omotosho said Kanu’s lawsuit should be dismissed because it lacks merit.

According to the News Agency of Nigeria, Kanu sued the Director-General of DSS, DSS, and the Attorney-General of the Federation as the first, second, and third respondents in the lawsuit, which was filed by his attorney.

The IPOB leader claimed in the lawsuit that the DSS had subjected him to a variety of inhumane treatment, including refusing him the freedom to wear any clothing of his choosing, such as the traditional Igbo clothing known as “Isi-Agu,” while he was in their facility or whenever he appeared in court for his trial.

He claimed that the security team only allowed one type of clothing to be worn, although allowing other prisoners under their care the freedom to wear anything they pleased.

The applicant also claimed that the DSS had tortured him and violated his right to dignity, among other things.

The DSS and its DG, however, urged the court to reject Kanu’s claim in a rebuttal affidavit.

They said that while Kanu was in their care, their operatives never physically or emotionally tormented him.

The DSS claims that Kanu, the applicant, is detained in the same facility as all other suspects.

They claimed it was incorrect that other suspects were permitted to dress however they pleased, including traditional Hausa and Yoruba garb.

They said that Kanu and the other suspects would not be permitted to enjoy themselves while dressing in their individual traditional garb at the facility or during a traditional celebration.

They claimed that their facilities have a Standard Operation Procedure (SOP) on appropriate attire for visitors.

“That in line with global best practices, persons in the 1st and 2nd respondents’ facility are allowed to wear only plain clothes which do not bear symbols, writings, colours and insignias that are offensive to any religion, ethnic group or even the Nigeria state in general,” they said.

They claimed that Kanu’s family had brought traditional garb, additional items bearing Biafra insignias, and a pair of red shoes embellished with sparkling beads for him to wear while he was being held in detention as well as to the court appearance for his trial.

The DSS claims that the petitioner is being prosecuted for wearing clothing with the colours of the fictitious Biafra Republic.

They said that the Isi-Agu outfit, also known as chieftaincy attire, was inappropriate for those in detention facilities and in violation of their SOP.

They further contended that Kanu should be permitted to wear any simple attire of his choosing, in accordance with the court’s direction, while Kanu is now on trial before Justice Binta Nyako.

According to the DSS, they never violated the IPOB leader’s right to human dignity as claimed.

Justice Omotosho, who gave the ruling, ruled that Section 34 of the 1999 Constitution contains the right to human dignity.

READ ALSO:

He asserted that it was obvious how a right to human dignity related to other rights, such as the prohibition of torture and cruel treatment.

According to the information presented to the court, the judge determined that Kanu’s case had nothing to do with torture or forced labour because those crimes were not involved.

He asserted that the ability to change clothes as a prison inmate is not a right to dignity.

“The applicant cannot come to court to seek rights which are not in the constitution,” he said.

In addition, Justice Omotosho ruled that Kanu had neglected to disclose the names and photos of the prisoners who were permitted to wear different clothes while detained.

He claimed that while it was his responsibility to provide evidence, the petitioner had only relied on simple facts.

He referred to the IPOB leader’s accusations as “a hypothesis without concrete evidence.”

As a result, the judge rejected the case for lack of merit.

Kanu last year’s similar lawsuit was dismissed by Justice Taiwo Taiwo, a retired judge of the court.