The Nigerian Medical Association (NMA) has told the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja that the medical complaints raised by the detained self-acclaimed leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, is not life-threatening.
An NMA pane constituted by the body’s president made the pronouncement on Thursday, October 16, 2025.
It could be recalled that Diaspora Digital Media (DDM) reported on October 1, 2025, that Mazi Kanu, had raised alarm over his health condition.
Kanu also lamented the abominable health care he receives at the detention facility of the Department of State Services (DSS) in Abuja.
In the “Formal Letter of Complaint and Appeal” addressed to NMA President, dated September 29, 2025, Kanu raised ‘grave concerns regarding his medical treatment and health management in DSS custody’.
According to Kanu, DSS doctors ‘treat him as an object, not as a patient’.
He further claimed that the doctors were given strict instructions never to explain anything to him or converse with him.
He requested for urgent intervention, seeking independent practitioners to make a proper evaluation of his health condition.
The freedom fighter also requested for the immediate release of his NMA medical assessment report to the court.
The letter was copied to relevant authorities, including Judge James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Read the full story below:
DSS Doctors Treat Me As Object, Falsify My Medical Records, Killing Me, Nnamdi Kanu Petitions NMA
Consequently, Judge Omotosho ordered NMA to make a proper evaluation and ascertain the actual status of Kanu’s health.
Responding to the order, the prosecution team led by Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) submitted NMA’s report to the court on October 13.
The report was read in open court during proceedings on Thursday.
The team concluded that Kanu is fit to stand trial, adding that his ailment is not life-threatening.
Ruling, the judge said the court expressed conviction that Kanu could proceed with the trial.
He, therefore, granted the defendant six consecutive days, beginning from October 23, to open and close his defence.
The defence lawyer, Kanu Agabi (SAN), made oral application for a private consultation with Kanu outside DSS premises.
Agabi said the legal team was afraid that their consultation with the defendant could be tapped or recorded by the secret police.
The judge granted the application.
He also granted Agabi’s request that the private meeting with Kanu be held in the courtroom with only his lawyers present.
The court directed that the private consultation will hold in the courtroom between 9 a.m. and 12 noon on October 22.
Afterwards, the trial will resume on October 23.
In another development, today, October 16, Nnamdi Kanu filed an objection to continuation of his trial.
Watch a video clip of his counsel, Barrister Aloy Ejimofor, speaking to newsmen after the court sitting below:
Kanu, in the objection, prayed the court for the following reliefs:
1. A Declaration that the continued prosecution of the Defendant under the repealed Terrorism (Prevention) Amendment Act 2013, and upon a proscription order obtained ex parte and without fair hearing, violates Sections 1(3), 36(1)–(12), and 42 of the Constitution and Articles 7 and 26 of the African Charter, and is therefore null and void.
2. A Declaration that the Federal High Court’s ex-parte order proscribing IPOB, obtained without notice or hearing and while Justice Binta Nyako’s subsisting ruling (that ”IPOB is not an unlawful society”) remained in force: ‘Is unconstitutional, unlawful, and cannot ground criminal liability.
3. An Order striking out or permanently staying Counts 1-8 (save Count 15) of the Amended Charge dated 14 January 2022 for being barred by double jeopardy, having the same factual ingredients as Counts 6-14 earlier struck out by the Federal High Court on 8 April 2022.
4. An Order declaring that the Defendant’s extraordinary rendition from Kenya without extradition proceedings or due process violated Section 36(1) & (9) of the Constitution, the Extradition Act (Cap E25 LFN 2004), and Articles 12 and 13 of the African Charter, thereby robbing this Honourable Court of jurisdiction.
5. An Order nullifying all proceedings conducted in breach of the Defendant’s right to adequate facilities for defence, confidential communication with counsel, and fair hearing—particularly the eavesdropping, seizure of legal materials, and denial of unmonitored access.
6. And for such further order(s) as this Honorable court may deem fit to make in the circumstance.
The defendant further argued that his continued prosecution despite the binding Court of Appeal discharge of October 13, 2022, and eight-day post-judgment detention constitutes flagrant contempt of court.
He also insisted that his kidnap and transfer from Kenya without extradition process violated Sections 36(1), (8), and (9) CFRN, Section 76(1)(d)(ii)–(iii) TPPA 2022, and Articlps, 7, 12, and 13 of the African Charter.
“The Court of Appeal… held that such rendition deprives any Nigerian court of jurisdiction to try him.
“Jurisdiction cannot be conferred by illegality,” he maintained.
Taking to his “X” handle, Barrister Ejimofor described what transpired in the court as “infamy”.
See a copy of the objection below:
