Justice Binta Nyako of Federal High Court, Abuja Friday dismissed an application  by the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, seeking to compel the Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai, to produce their missing leader, Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. 
Justice Nyako held  that Kanu's Counsel failed to convince the court that the IPOB leader was seen with soldiers at any time.

  "The doctrine of last seen", which the applicant relied upon, even though applicable in murder cases, has no statutory backing.

 "Has the applicant placed enough evidence to show that the respondent was the last to see the applicant? Was there any evidence that he was last seen with even one soldier? The onus of proof will not shift from the applicant to the respondent except the applicant is able to prove that he was last seen by the respondent. This they have failed to do.

 "This application fails and it is hereby dismissed. Be ready for your case", the Judge held, and further  noted that Kanu was listed in the suit as the main applicant.

 Justice Nyako said she was surprised that someone that was said to be missing was the one seeking reliefs from the court, adding that the lawyers ought to have rather commenced the action "in the name of applicant".

 Kanu's team of lawyers led by  Mr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor had  applied for "an order of Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum, commanding the Respondent (Buratai), to produce the Applicant in Court."

 They premised the application on section 40 of the Federal High Court Act,  F12, LFN 2005 and section 6(6) (1) (4) of the 1999 constitution, as amended.

 Arguing his application, Ejiofor, told the court that they have not seen or heard from their client since the Nigerian Army invaded his house, since September 14, 2017.

 "on a murderous raid, where life and mortar bullets were fired on unarmed and defenceless populace, leaving 28 persons dead and abducting many".

 However, the Army Chief, in a counter affidavit deposed by a colonel attached to the Chief of Army’s office in the Army Headquarters, Abuja, Col. A.A Yusuf,  told the court that Kanu was not in custody of the Nigeria Army, adding that soldiers who were deployed to the South-East for ‘Operation Python Dance II, did not have any contact whatsoever with Kanu on September 12 or 14, or anytime thereafter as alleged.

 Going further in the counter affidavit, Bututai maintained that the Nigerian Army did not at any time arrest or took Kanu into custody within the period the military operation lasted.

 He stressed that the allegation that soldiers invaded the IPOB leader’s house in Afara-Ukwu Ibeku, Umuahia, Abia State was totally false.

 The Army boss told the court that his men only chased a truck he said was laden with arms and explosives of different kinds, into a compound he said was later discovered to belong to Kanu and his father.

 Consequently, Ejiofor asked the next line of action in respect of Kanu's pending trial, since his whereabouts has remained unknown.

 In her response Justice Nyako said: "As far as I am concerned, the applicant is on bail. Was he not released on bail based on an undertaking by sureties?

 "The sureties guaranteed to produce the applicant in court for his trial, so three of them should produce him. They made an undertaking and deposed to the fact that they will produce him to stand trial.

 "If there is any reason they cannot produce him, they should tell me on that date", Justice Nyako held

 The court adjourned to  February 20, 2018