Proceedings in the alleged defamation case against African Action Congress presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, were on Monday abruptly halted after a heated exchange between two Senior Advocates of Nigeria disrupted proceedings at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The case, instituted by the Department of State Services, was scheduled to continue with the defence, but arguments between Sowore’s lead counsel, Adeyinka Olumide Fusika (SAN), and counsel to the DSS, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), forced the court to suspend the hearing.
The disagreement began after Olumide Fusika applied for an adjournment, explaining that certified court documents required for the day’s proceedings had only been released to him by the court registry on Monday, despite his application being approved several days earlier.
He told the court that additional time was needed to study the documents before proceeding with the cross examination of the next prosecution witness, an official of the DSS.
However, Kehinde opposed the request, arguing that the application was another attempt to delay the trial.
He urged the court to reject the adjournment and consider closing the defence’s case over what he described as repeated delays.
The submission triggered a tense verbal exchange, with Olumide Fusika strongly objecting to the allegation.
He insisted that describing his application as a delay tactic was offensive and maintained that he was acting within the bounds of the law.
As tempers flared, the presiding judge, Justice Mohammed Garba Umar, intervened and cautioned both senior lawyers over their conduct, warning that any further display of misconduct could attract disciplinary action.
The judge stressed that the courtroom must be treated with decorum and respect, adding that he would not continue with the proceedings under such circumstances.
Justice Umar subsequently adjourned the matter until September 20, 2026, for the continuation of the defence.
Following the adjournment, Kehinde apologised to the court, members of the legal profession and those present in the courtroom, expressing regret over the exchange and acknowledging that the conduct of counsel had fallen short of expected professional standards.