Drama As Court Adjourns Alleged Illegal Eviction Case To April 24

There was a mild drama at a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court sitting in Maitama, Abuja, when a lawyer, Abubakar Mohammed, who had been hired only to observe proceedings, stood up and told Justice Samira Bature that the case before her was being delayed.

Mohammed was hired by Asabe Waziri, who had alleged and complained to the attorney-general of the federation (AGF) that she was illegally evicted from a property in Maitama District of Abuja, where she lived, to only watch and observe proceedings before the court.

A lawyer, Victor Giwa, Cecil Osakwe and Ms Edith Erhunmuuse, were accused of illegally ejecting Asabe from the property.

Shortly after, Mohammed spoke, and Giwa stood up and told the court that the counsel to Asabe, Mohammed, had no right to speak before the court; he was only there to announce his appearance and to watch proceedings.

According to him, Mohammed was his staff, hired by Asabe to appear in the case against him.

He said, “The victim (Asabe) is the one harassing me; she is now using my former staff against me in court. He has no right to address the court; his mission in this court is only to watch brief for the victim.”

But Justice Bature, in her response, agreed with Giwa and said that she did not record everything Mohammed said.

The case, however, could not proceed due to the absence of Erhunmuuse, who was said to be ill and unable to afford a lawyer.

The case was adjourned to April 24, 2024.

At the last adjourned date, the court was told that the case had earlier suffered delays, including an adjournment to allow the third defendant to secure legal representation.

Although the third defendant is now represented by  Mr C. C. Onyechere, she was absent from court, with her counsel attributing her absence to ill health.

The prosecution also informed the court that at a previous sitting, proceedings were stalled after the counsel handling the matter was said to be on official assignment outside the country.

Justice Bature recalled that the court had warned against delays capable of frustrating the arraignment of the defendants.

In her ruling, Justice Bature held that although the matter had suffered several adjournments, she warned that no further adjournment would be tolerated.