Chrisland Supervisor Accused Of Defiling Child Petitions NJC, Says Judge Is Bias

Chrisland School Supervisor,Adegboyega Adenekan

Chrisland School Supervisor, Adegboyega Adenekan, on trial for allegedly defiling a two-year and 11-month old pupil of the school, has petitioned the National Judicial Council (NJC) over his trial.

Adenekan has accused the trial judge, Justice Sybil Nwaka of an Ikeja Sexual Offences and Domectic Violence Court, of bias.

During resumed proceedings on Tuesday, Justice Nwaka expressed displeasure about the delays allegedly caused by the defence in filing their final written address after the prosecution and defence had closed their cases.

Addressing the defence counsel, Mrs. M. Obi-Farinde, the trial judge recalled that the defence had filed a Motion on Notice dated October 14 requesting that she excuse herself from the case and that the defendant had filed a petition against her.

She noted that an exhibit, a copy of the petition to the NJC, written by the defendant in the case

“This is a 2017 case and we have gone through the rigors of trial and at the point of conclusion, you come up with a motion.

“I am adjourning till tomorrow and you will come to court to move your motion and adopt your final written address. If you are not here, the needful will be done,” the judge said.

Earlier during proceedings, the prosecutor, Mr Babajide Boye, informed the court that the defence had delayed filing of their court processes.

Boye noted that the defence filed their final written address on October 15, three months after the order of the court.

Justice Nwaka had ordered parties to file their final written address on July 14.

Boye said the delay on the part of the defence was a calculated attempt to “frustrate and abort” the case.

“We see it as an ambush and we have filed a fresh final written address and the defence also filed a Motion on Notice dated October 14 and we have filed a counter-affidavit in response.

“It is clear that the defence is trying to stall proceedings, we apply that the right of the defence to reply the final written address be foreclosed,” Boye said.

Obi-Farinde in her response, denied the allegations of the prosecution.

“It is not correct that the defendant just filed its final written address, it was dated September 19 and filed on September 20.

“The file was not in court because of the compilation of appeal, the counsel we sent missed the file,” she said.

Obi-Farinde noted that the defence needed time to respond to the prosecution’s fresh final written address which was dated October 15.

“They (the prosecution) have raised certain issues that we need to respond to.

“It was not our intent to hold back the court, it is in the interest of justice and fair hearing for us to respond to their final written address,” she said.

Justice Nwaka however disagreed with the defence counsel’s claim that the file of the case was not in court.

“As at September 19, the file was here in court, that is your lack of due diligence, the file was in this court,” she insisted.

The judge adjourned the case till October 16 for adoption of final written addresses by parties