The Federal Capital Territory High Court in Maitama, Abuja, on Friday ordered the arrest of a lawyer, Victor Giwa, and a police officer, Edith Erhunmuuse, over their repeated failure to appear for arraignment in an ongoing criminal case.
Justice Samira Bature issued the bench warrant following an application by the prosecution counsel, Aderonke Imana.
The case, marked FCT/HC/CR/222/2023, involves three defendants—Cecil Osakwe, Victor Giwa, and Edith Erhunmuuse—who are standing trial on a nine-count charge bordering on alleged criminal acts, including forceful eviction of occupants and property damage valued at about N300 million.
Delivering her ruling, Justice Bature said she had reviewed the case file and agreed with the prosecution that the defendants had repeatedly stalled proceedings.
“As a legal practitioner, he ought to know better. Indeed, this matter was filed in 2023. It commenced before this court on July 16, 2024.
Unfortunately, up till today, being the 24th day of April, 2026, approaching two years now, arraignment has not been possible for one reason or the other,” she said.
The judge held that medical documents and letters presented by the second defendant were not convincing, describing them as attempts to delay the proceedings.
She further faulted the conduct of the third defendant, noting persistent absence from court and rejection of legal representation offered through the Legal Aid Council.
“The third defendant, on the last adjourned date, had insinuated that the prosecution is delaying this trial, but the circumstances clearly show that it is the other way around.
The third defendant, who appeared only once in this case, has chosen to completely stay away from these proceedings, as she has consistently been absent.
The court registrar was instructed to write to the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria to secure representation of counsel on her behalf.
The court has been reliably informed that the third defendant declined the offer by the Legal Aid Council to represent her in this case, as the council had already been assigned the case to defend her, but she refused,” the judge held.
Justice Bature stressed that the court would not continue to tolerate delays, adding that criminal proceedings could only properly begin after arraignment.
“On Mr Aboje’s submissions that there are pending applications, particularly the one dated February 2, 2026;
Let me state that the position of the law, as rightly pointed out by the prosecution counsel, is that the jurisdiction of the court in criminal matters is activated after a valid arraignment,” she said.
She maintained that pending applications could not halt arraignment.
READ ALSO: Court fines Malami N200,000 over FG absence for Nnamdi Kanu co-defendants trial
“Therefore, this court shall proceed with arraignment irrespective of any pending applications.
In the meantime, the prosecution’s application is granted. A bench warrant is ordered for the arrest of the second and third defendants,” she ruled.
The matter was subsequently adjourned until April 29, 2026, for arraignment.
Earlier in the proceedings, prosecution counsel Aderonke Imana told the court that the defendants had consistently frustrated efforts to begin trial since the charge was filed in January 2023.
“There has been a systematic pattern of either the first defendant being absent in court or the second defendant being absent,” she said.
She urged the court to invoke Sections 113 and 114 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, insisting that the repeated absences were deliberate and unjustified.
“Our application is imperative. It is not the intention of the prosecution to keep coming to court for adjournments.
Since the second defendant did not notify our office of his intention not to be in court, a bench warrant should be issued. The second defendant has not shown any seriousness before this court,” she added.
However, counsel for the second defendant, Ogbu Aboje, opposed the request, arguing that his client was absent due to illness and had filed a medical report alongside a pending application dated February 2, 2026.
“We rely on Section 135 of the ACJA 2015.
We urge this court to dispense with the appearance of the second defendant in view of that application. He is not available today due to his illness. On the last sitting, he was in court,” he said.
In response, the prosecution maintained that arraignment remained a fundamental step in criminal proceedings, arguing that no valid trial could proceed without it.
The first defendant, Cecil Osakwe, was present in court and represented by Farouk Akambi.