Suswam’s Trial Adjourned Again as Court Sets September Date

(EFCC. Photo by Channels Tv)

Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Thursday, July 16, 2026, adjourned the trial of former Benue State governor, Gabriel Suswam, until September 25, 2026, for the adoption of final written addresses.

At the start of proceedings, prosecution counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, informed the court that the matter had been scheduled for adoption of final written addresses, but noted that a letter had been received from Suswam’s counsel, Paul Erokoro, SAN.

Indicating that both he and his client, the first defendant, would be unable to attend due to health reasons.

Jacobs said the letter urged him to apply for an adjournment on the basis of the defendant’s ill health.

Expressing surprise at the request, Jacobs said he intended to oppose the application and instead urged the court to allow the adoption of the written addresses to proceed, rather than granting yet another adjournment in a case that has dragged on for 11 years and seen five different judges preside over it.

While asking the court to push the matter to Friday, July 17, 2026, Jacobs proposed that the defendant be allowed to join proceedings virtually via Zoom, even from home.

He argued that the case should have concluded more than a year ago, pointing out that the first defendant had reportedly been seen attending public functions as recently as the previous week, which he described as mockery of the justice system and an affront to its credibility.

Counsel to the second defendant, Audu Agunga, SAN, said the reasons given in the letter suggested that the first defendant needed rest, noting that his own client happened to be in good health.

He said he had no objection to the adjournment request, describing it as reasonable and in the interest of justice, and left the matter to the court’s discretion.

In response, Jacobs criticised what he perceived as an attempt by the second defendant’s counsel to speak on behalf of the first defendant, arguing that a respondent’s role in such an application should be limited to either supporting or opposing it, not assuming the position of another defendant’s counsel.

He further argued that the court could disregard the adjournment request altogether, since no medical documentation had been presented, and cited Section 266 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, ACJA, which he said permits an application to be heard even in a defendant’s absence.

Justice Lifu subsequently adjourned the matter until September 25, 2026, for the adoption of final written addresses by counsel.