Nnamdi Kanu Explains Why Sokoto Prison Is Not Suitable for His Detention

In a new twist to the ongoing legal battle between the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, and the Federal Government, the detained Biafra agitator has raised strong objections to the Federal Government’s move to transfer him from the Department of State Services (DSS) custody in Abuja to a correctional facility in Sokoto State.

Kanu, through his legal team, has insisted that Sokoto Prison is not suitable for his detention, citing serious concerns bordering on safety, access to medical care, political tension, and the high level of hostility that he believes could endanger his life.

The development has generated widespread discussions across Nigeria, especially within the Southeast, where his supporters view the proposed transfer as not only unnecessary but also a potential violation of his fundamental rights.

Why Kanu Says Sokoto Prison Is Not Suitable

According to statements from his lawyers and close associates, Nnamdi Kanu outlined several key reasons why he believes a transfer to Sokoto Correctional Centre would be dangerous and inappropriate at this point in his trial.

1. Security and Threat to Life

Kanu reportedly stated that placing him in a correctional facility in the far North—especially in a strongly conservative region like Sokoto—would expose him to possible threats from extremist elements who may consider his pro-Biafra ideology offensive or provocative.

His legal team argues that his safety could be compromised due to heightened religious and ethnic sensitivities in the state. Sokoto, being a core northern state with a predominantly Muslim population, has witnessed several incidents of mob actions over religious matters. According to Kanu’s supporters, this environment could embolden radical groups who might see him as a target.

Kanu insists that his detention should not be politicized or weaponized, stressing that no defendant should be kept in a facility where the risk to his life is higher than necessary.

2. Limited Access to Lawyers and Family

Another major concern raised by Kanu is the difficulty his legal team and family members would face in visiting him if he is moved to Sokoto.

Most of his lawyers operate from Abuja and the Southeast. Transporting defense teams regularly to the extreme North for consultations, document reviews and case preparations would become practically difficult and financially burdensome.

His family, especially his aged parents and siblings, would also struggle to embark on such long and risky travels. Legal analysts say this could weaken his defense, slow down trial preparations, and potentially violate his constitutional right to adequate legal representation.

3. Access to Medical Care

Nnamdi Kanu has consistently complained about health challenges since he was re-arrested and returned to Nigeria in 2021. His legal team has repeatedly warned that he requires regular specialist medical attention.

He fears that being moved to Sokoto—far from his current medical arrangement in Abuja—may worsen his health condition due to:

• Limited access to advanced medical facilities
• Delay in emergency response
• Difficulty in transporting him to the National Hospital or other specialist centers
• The harsh weather conditions in the far North

Kanu insists that his health condition is delicate, and moving him without medical necessity poses unnecessary risks.

4. Concerns Over Fair Hearing

Kanu equally pointed out that transferring him to a distant jurisdiction may interfere with his right to fair hearing. Most of the witnesses, lawyers, and materials relevant to his case are based in Abuja.

Legal experts say that relocating him to Sokoto could open the door to procedural delays, stalled hearings, and unnecessary adjournments. There is also the fear that the move could be interpreted as an attempt to isolate him from public attention and reduce the level of media scrutiny surrounding the trial.

IPOB and Southeast Leaders React

The proposed transfer to Sokoto has sparked strong reactions across the Southeast. IPOB, in a statement, described the move as a “deliberate attempt to silence and psychologically torture” their leader.

Some Southeast political leaders also expressed concerns, emphasizing that anything that heightens regional tensions should be avoided. They called on the Federal Government to prioritize transparency, fairness, and security in handling the matter.

Human rights groups, including Amnesty International (local chapter), have also warned that the government must avoid any action that might place a detainee in harm’s way or restrict his access to justice.

Federal Government’s Position

Although the Federal Government has not officially given a detailed explanation, sources say security agencies proposed the transfer for "logistical and administrative reasons."

However, critics argue that such explanations are insufficient given the delicate nature of the case and the political implications surrounding Kanu’s detention.

What Happens Next?

Kanu’s lawyers have already filed objections in court, asking the judge to stop any attempt to relocate him from Abuja. The court is expected to rule on the matter in the coming days.

Observers believe the court may weigh three critical questions:

1. Is Sokoto Prison secure and adequately equipped to handle a high-profile detainee like Kanu?
2. Will the transfer violate his right to fair hearing and access to lawyers?
3. Does the move pose any health or safety risk?

Whatever decision the court makes will have significant political and social implications, especially considering ongoing agitation in the Southeast.

Conclusion

Nnamdi Kanu’s strong position against being moved to Sokoto Prison highlights the deep mistrust and tension that have characterized his trial over the years. For many Nigerians, the key concern is ensuring that justice is served in a fair, transparent, and humane way—without actions that appear politically motivated or capable of igniting further unrest.

As the legal battle continues, all eyes are on the court to determine the next chapter in a case that remains one of the most sensitive and divisive issues in Nigeria.