Tempers flared at the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday as counsel to the Department of State Services (DSS), Kehinde Akinlolu, and Omoyele Sowore’s lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika (SAN), engaged in a heated exchange during proceedings.
Naijaonpoint reports that the confrontation followed a disagreement over the defence’s inability to obtain the Certified True Copy of a prosecution witness’s summary report, which it said was required for the continuation of its case.
The trial judge eventually adjourned proceedings until September 20, 2026, after saying the altercation had left him in no frame of mind to continue.
The matter had been scheduled for the continuation of the defence’s case when Olumide-Fusika informed the court that an application for the release of the Certified True Copy of the summary report of a prosecution witness, identified as XYZ, was still pending before the registry.
The senior lawyer said the application was filed on July 22 and that the defence only discovered during Monday’s proceedings that the judge had approved it on July 27.
He, however, said the court registry had yet to release the documents.
According to Olumide-Fusika, the report was central to the questions already prepared for the cross-examination of a subpoenaed witness.
Akinlolu opposed the defence’s request and accused Sowore’s legal team of employing “dilatory tactics” to prolong the trial.
He argued that the defence was not prepared to proceed and urged the court to close its case.
“I submit that this is the appropriate stage for Your Lordship to close the defence’s case, having repeatedly afforded the defence opportunities which it has deliberately and persistently failed to utilise,” Akinlolu said.
The DSS counsel recalled that both sides had agreed at the previous sitting on July 28 that an officer of the security agency would appear to testify for the defence and identify documents it intended to rely upon.
He maintained that the defence had repeatedly failed to produce NAIJAONPOINT despite opportunities granted by the court.
Olumide-Fusika rejected the allegation and said the delay was caused by administrative lapses within the court registry.
He explained that the defence had applied for certified copies of the charge and other processes, particularly NAIJAONPOINT report contained in the court’s file.
“We do not work in Your Lordship’s office or in the registry. We were informed that the documents had not yet been approved,” he said.
“It was only after further inquiries this morning that it became clear the approval had been granted earlier.”
The senior lawyer argued that the defence could not properly cross-examine NAIJAONPOINT without the documents.
He also said he had postponed an overseas trip to attend the proceedings, disputing suggestions that he was deliberately delaying the trial.
“If I intended to delay this matter, I simply would not have appeared in court today. I cancelled my travel because I considered it important to be here,” he said.
The proceedings became tense when Olumide-Fusika accused the prosecutor of repeatedly using derogatory language against him.
He described Akinlolu’s conduct as disrespectful and told the court he would no longer tolerate personal attacks.
Akinlolu attempted to interrupt him, prompting a verbal exchange.
“This court does not belong to you,” Akinlolu said.
Olumide-Fusika replied, “Does it belong to you? You cannot keep interrupting me.”
The senior advocate further accused the prosecutor of behaving like a persecutor by repeatedly asking the court to close the defence’s case and imprison Sowore.
“You are behaving like a persecutor, using the wrong language against me all the time,” he said.
The judge intervened and warned Olumide-Fusika against raising his voice in court.
He said any repeat occurrence could lead to a report to the appropriate disciplinary authority.
The court also cautioned both lawyers to maintain decorum, noting that junior counsel were present and could be negatively influenced by their conduct.
Akinlolu subsequently apologised to the court and to the younger lawyers, acknowledging that his actions contributed to the confrontation.
The judge, however, said he was no longer in the proper frame of mind to continue the matter and adjourned the case until September 20 for continuation of the defence.
