The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was expected to present a witness while opening the defence today, July 3. Although they had three witnesses to call, none of them was present in court.
The lawyer said the first witness had just informed him that he had a family emergency and could not make it to court.
Livy Uzoukwu, counsel to Peter Obi; Wole Olanipekun, Tinubu’s counsel; Lateef Fagbemi, counsel for the All Progressives Congress (APC); did not oppose the request for adjournment.
The five-member panel of the court led by Haruna Tsammani, adjourned the case to Tuesday, July 4.
About the Author
The detail that all three INEC witnesses were absent and the first cited a family emergency is striking, especially since none of the opposing counsel raised an objection to the adjournment. It leaves the tribunal’s schedule hinging on witness availability rather than argument. I sometimes step away from heavy news cycles with a quick browser word game like noillirk.app to reset.
The detail that all three of INEC’s witnesses were absent on the same day — with the first citing a family emergency only after the hearing was due to start — makes the adjournment to July 4 feel less like a routine procedural step. It’s notable that all counsel, including Uzoukwu and Olanipekun, raised no objection, which keeps the timetable tight. Court-watching stretches like this leave a lot of dead time between sessions, and I’ve found a quick browser round of something like the krillion.me word game a decent way to fill those gaps.
The detail that INEC had three witnesses lined up but none appeared, with the first citing a family emergency, shows how fragile a scheduled defence can be. It’s notable that all counsel, including Livy Uzoukwu and Wole Olanipekun, agreed to the adjournment without objection, which keeps the July 4 timeline intact. Court-watching stretches like this leave a lot of waiting around, so I sometimes pass the downtime with something light like the bluffing game at mimicparty.me.