The news says: The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory sitting in Apo was forced to adjourn the forgery and impersonation trial of Abuja-based lawyer Victor Giwa after defence counsel exited the courtroom before the presiding judge entered, leaving the defendant without representation.
Who are the people involved in this courtroom drama? Victor Giwa (defendant, Abuja-based lawyer accused of forgery and impersonation), Ibitade Bukola (co-accused), Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie (presiding judge), Farooq Akanbi (defence counsel who walked out), Wisdom Madaki (prosecuting counsel), Eristo Asaph (prosecution lead), and the Inspector-General of Police’s legal team.
Where did this happen? The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory sitting in Apo, Abuja. The trial is ongoing before Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie.
What happened in court? Defence counsel Farooq Akanbi arrived in court but left before proceedings commenced. He left his client without representation. The defendant, Victor Giwa, then offered to represent himself. The judge refused, saying the counsel remains on record and must “clear the air” about his absence. The judge also noted that the defence showed “no respect for the court.” The matter was adjourned to June 10, 2026.
When did this happen? Wednesday, June 3, 2026. The adjourned date is June 10, 2026. The June 4 sitting was vacated due to the court’s official engagement.
Why did the defence counsel walk out? The report does not give his reason. The prosecution alleged it was “a deliberate attempt to stall the proceedings.” The counsel had been served with the prosecution’s response to Giwa’s application for release of his international passport. He reportedly said he had no objection but insisted “his motion was more important.” He then left.
How did the court react? The judge was firm. He refused to allow self-representation. He said: “I will not allow that. The first defendant has counsel. Let him come and clear the air.” He also noted that the defence showed “no respect for the court” by failing to ensure representation or formally notifying the court of any change.
8 unbelievable realities from this courtroom drama.
- A lawyer representing a client in a forgery and impersonation case walked out of court before the judge arrived – leaving his client stranded. This is not a minor procedural error. This is a lawyer abandoning his client in a criminal trial. The defendant, Victor Giwa, is himself a lawyer facing serious allegations: forging official documents and impersonating a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Awa Kalu. His own lawyer left him. The irony is heavy.
- The judge refused to let the defendant represent himself – even though the constitution gives him that right. Giwa cited Section 36(6)(C) of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees the right to defend oneself in person. Justice Onwuegbuzie refused. His reason: the counsel remains on record and must explain his absence. Legally, this is questionable. Constitutionally, a defendant can choose self-representation at any time. The judge’s refusal may become a ground for appeal.
- The prosecution alleged the walkout was a “deliberate attempt to stall proceedings.” Wisdom Madaki told the court that the defence had been served with documents. The counsel had no objection to those documents. But he insisted “his motion was more important” – then left. From the prosecution’s view, this is a tactic. Delay the trial. Frustrate the court. Wear down the prosecution. It is a common but frustrating strategy in Nigerian courts.
- The judge said the defence showed “no respect for the court.” That is a strong rebuke from a sitting judge. In Nigerian legal culture, respect for the court is paramount. Walking out before the judge enters – without formally withdrawing from the case – is a serious breach of professional conduct. The judge could have issued a bench warrant for the counsel or referred him to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee. He chose adjournment instead. That was lenient.
- The defendant was willing to proceed immediately – but the judge adjourned anyway. Giwa said he would represent himself. The prosecution asked the court to proceed. But the judge said no. So a trial that could have moved forward was stopped because of the actions of a lawyer who was not even in the room. The defendant who wants a speedy trial is being delayed by his own absent counsel. That is Kafkaesque.
- The June 4 sitting was vacated due to the court’s official engagement – compounding the delay. Not only was Wednesday’s hearing disrupted, but the next scheduled date (June 4) is also cancelled. The court has other business. So the trial now jumps from June 3 to June 10. That is a full week lost. For a defendant who wants his international passport released (one of the applications before the court), every day of delay costs him.
- The allegations are serious: forgery and impersonation of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria. The victim is Awa Kalu, a respected SAN. Impersonating a SAN is not a petty crime. SANs are elite lawyers with exclusive privileges. Forgery of official documents undermines public trust in legal processes. This is not a case that should be delayed by courtroom antics. The public has an interest in a speedy resolution.
- The adjournment means the application for release of Giwa’s international passport is also delayed. Giwa’s urgency was about getting his passport back. He told the court he wanted to represent himself because of the urgency. Now, with the adjournment, his passport remains with the court or prosecution. If he had legitimate travel plans, they are now disrupted. If he was planning to flee, the delay benefits the prosecution. Either way, the uncertainty continues.
How this affects Nigerians and the legal system.
i. It damages public confidence in the legal profession. When a lawyer abandons his client in court, it reinforces the negative stereotype that lawyers are more interested in fees, delays, and technicalities than in justice. Nigerians already distrust the legal system. This kind of behaviour makes it worse.
ii. It wastes judicial time and resources. Court time is scarce. Judges have hundreds of cases. When one case is disrupted by a counsel’s walkout, that time could have been used for another matter. The adjournment means the judge will spend another full day on this case when it eventually resumes. That is a loss to the entire judicial system.
iii. It raises questions about legal ethics and professional discipline. The Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee exists to sanction lawyers who breach professional conduct rules. Walking out on a client and refusing to appear before a judge are clear violations. Will the Bar take action? Or will this counsel face no consequences? The answer will tell young lawyers whether ethical rules are enforced or ignored.
iv. It shows how defendants can be trapped by their own lawyers. Giwa wants to represent himself. The constitution says he can. But the judge says no because his counsel remains on record. Giwa cannot simply fire his counsel without formal notice. He cannot force his counsel to return. He is stuck. A defendant who wants a speedy trial is at the mercy of a lawyer who walked out. That is a system failure.
v. It highlights the need for judges to handle courtroom disruption firmly. Some judges would have issued a warrant for the absent counsel. Others would have allowed self-representation. Justice Onwuegbuzie chose adjournment. That is the safest option, but also the slowest. Nigerian judges need clearer guidelines on how to handle counsel who deliberately absent themselves.
Advice from this analyst.
- To Farooq Akanbi (defence counsel): you owe the court an explanation. You owe your client an explanation. If you withdrew from the case, you should have filed a formal notice. If you did not withdraw, your absence was inexcusable. Appear before Justice Onwuegbuzie on June 10. Apologise. Explain. Or face potential disciplinary action. The legal profession is watching.
- To Victor Giwa (defendant): file a formal application to change your legal representation. Do not just announce it in court. Put it in writing. State that you wish to either represent yourself or appoint new counsel. The judge cannot ignore a formal written application the way he ignored your oral request. Paperwork matters.
- To the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee: investigate this conduct. A lawyer walking out of court before the judge enters, leaving a client without representation in a criminal trial, is a professional misconduct. Even if the counsel had a valid reason, he must explain it. If he has no valid reason, sanction him. This will deter others.
- To Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie: on June 10, give the counsel a final chance to explain. If his explanation is unsatisfactory, consider referring him to the LPDC. Also, allow Giwa to formally change his legal representation. A defendant who wants a speedy trial should not be forced to keep a lawyer who abandoned him.
- To the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA): issue a statement reminding lawyers of their ethical duties. A lawyer cannot simply walk out of court without formal withdrawal. The Rules of Professional Conduct are clear. Remind your members. Publish the rules. Educate young lawyers. Prevention is better than discipline.
- To the prosecution: be prepared for June 10. If the defence counsel still does not appear, ask the court to proceed in his absence or to strike out his representation. Do not allow another adjournment. The prosecution has a duty to prosecute diligently – not to allow endless delays.
- To law students and young lawyers: learn from this. Do not walk out on a client. Do not disrespect the court. If you cannot continue a case, file a formal notice of withdrawal. Give your client time to find new representation. Professionalism is not optional. It is the minimum standard.
- To the public: watch this case. It will test whether the Nigerian legal system can handle lawyers who disrupt proceedings. If the counsel faces no consequences, expect more of this behaviour. If he is disciplined, it will be a warning to others. Justice is not just about the final verdict. It is about the process. And the process must be respected by everyone – lawyers included.
Rhetorical question for you.
If a lawyer can walk out of court before the judge enters, leave his client without representation, and cause a full adjournment – and the worst consequence is a stern warning and a new date – what message does that send to every other lawyer who wants to delay a case they are losing?
The message is clear: delay works. Disrespect has no cost. Adjournments are free. And justice can wait. That is not a message any legal system should send.
🎓 Attend 2027/2028 JAMB, Post-UTME, WAEC, and NECO GCE Tutorials
Get fully prepared with expert tutors, comprehensive study materials, and personalised academic guidance at Akahi Tutors.
📍 Located at 67, Oduduwa College Road, Off Sabo Junction, Ile-Ife.
📞 Call: 08038644328
for enrollment and accommodation reservation.
Akahi News reports that the trial of Victor Giwa has been adjourned to June 10, 2026 – not because of any complexity in the case, but because a defence counsel walked out before the judge entered. The judge called it disrespectful. The prosecution called it a deliberate stall. The defendant offered to represent himself. But the court said no. So the case waits. The defendant waits. The alleged forgery and impersonation of a Senior Advocate remain unaddressed. And one lawyer who left the courtroom early has taught the entire legal profession a dangerous lesson: disrupt the court, and the court will reward you with more time. That lesson must be unlearned. The question is whether the judiciary has the will to teach it.