FCT Court Grants Adjournment In Giwa Trial Again

An FCT High Court in Maitama, Abuja, on Monday, the 26th of January, 2026, granted another adjournment in the ongoing trial of Abuja-based lawyer Victor Giwa and his co-defendant, Ibitade Bukola, who face allegations of forgery and impersonation, despite strong objections from the prosecution.

This latest adjournment marks the seventh instance in which Giwa has requested a delay since the trial began, and the fourth time he has switched legal representation.

Giwa and Bukola are accused of allegedly forging official documents and impersonating a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Awa Kalu, allegedly intending to mislead the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) into withdrawing a prior criminal charge against Giwa.

At the resumed session, the prosecution was represented by T. Y. Silas for the Inspector-General of Police, while Ogbu Aboje appeared for the second defendant. Levi E. Nwoye held a watching brief on behalf of the complainant.

Farook Akabi of the law firm of Ahmed Raji, SAN, represented Giwa. Addressing the court, Silas noted that the day had been set aside for the hearing of the prosecution’s motion and requested permission to proceed.

In response, Akabi explained that his firm had only been briefed the previous day, as Ahmed Raji, SAN, had originally intended to personally handle the case but was engaged elsewhere. Akabi therefore applied for an adjournment to allow sufficient time for proper defence preparation.

The prosecution strongly opposed the request. “This is the seventh date the first defendant is seeking adjournment to prevent this motion from being heard,” Silas stated. “It is also the fourth time he is changing counsel strictly to delay this trial.”

Silas argued further that Giwa was fully aware of the hearing schedule and had previously assured the court of his readiness to conduct his defence. He added that all necessary filings had been completed, with the last submission made on the 1st of December, 2025.

Citing Section 396(4) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2018, and Section 36(4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Silas contended that Giwa had exceeded the statutory limits for adjournments. “The first defendant has become an obstacle to a fair trial within a reasonable time,” he said. He also referenced Supreme Court rulings in Etsako West LGA v. Christopher and Tiput v. Dawankat, emphasizing that litigation cannot be allowed to drag on indefinitely.

Ogbu Aboje, representing Bukola, called on the court to consider the records but appealed for measured discretion. He revealed that he had contacted Ahmed Raji, SAN, who confirmed he had been briefed just a day earlier and intended to assume control of the case. Aboje also informed the court of a pending application by Giwa to relist an earlier motion that had been struck out, requesting the court hear it in the interest of justice. He noted that Bukola did not object to a brief adjournment.

READ ALSO: FCT Court Warns Lawyer Over Attempted Private Meeting Amid Ongoing Trial

In delivering the ruling, the trial judge expressed concern about what was described as a recurring pattern of delays by Giwa. “Each time the first defendant appears, he adopts a storyline to prevent the matter from proceeding,” the judge observed, adding, “the court works with evidence, not theatrics.”

The court highlighted that Giwa had at various times represented himself and had been assisted by three different Senior Advocates of Nigeria and over 30 other counsel since the trial began. The judge recalled prior warnings against tactics aimed at delaying proceedings and referenced Giwa’s claim that he had petitioned the Chief Judge and the National Judicial Council (NJC).

According to the court, the NJC had responded, advising Giwa that his petition could not halt the trial and that the assignment of cases remains under the discretion of the Chief Judge.

Despite noting the repeated postponements, the court ruled that “in the interest of justice,” the hearing would be adjourned. The trial was therefore rescheduled for February 4 to continue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.