Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Tayo Oyetibo, on Monday described the directive to reinvestigate a case already before the court as an act of oppression and an abuse of court process.
Oyetibo, who is lead defence counsel to property developer, Alex Ochonogor, made the remark during proceedings before the Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square. Ochonogor is standing trial alongside two legal practitioners, Ademola Owolabi and Adebayo Akeju, on allegations of forgery and wilful destruction of property.
The three defendants were arraigned on a five-count charge bordering on conspiracy to commit forgery, forgery, and wilful destruction of property.
The charges were filed by the Lagos State Government under suit number LD/23611C/2024. According to the prosecution, the case involves the alleged forgery of land documents and the demolition of a property located in the Lekki area of Lagos.
When the matter came up on Monday before Justice Sherifat Sonaike, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Dr. Babajide Martins, applied for an adjournment at the instance of the Attorney General of Lagos State.
The request was strongly opposed by Oyetibo.
Dr. Martins informed the court that the Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Lawal Pedro (SAN), had directed the police to reinvestigate the matter.
He said: “The matter is not going on as the AG has directed that the police reinvestigate it. I would like to ask for an adjournment for a couple of months so that the police can carry out the investigation.”
While counsel to the first and second defendants — Dr. Abiodun Layonu (SAN) and M. A. Bashua (SAN) — did not oppose the adjournment, Oyetibo, representing the third defendant, described the move as “oppressive” and “an abuse of court process.”
“We see this as an oppression. It’s an abuse of the court processes. You cannot file a matter and then ask the police to reinvestigate it. The case shouldn’t have come to court in the first place if it had not been investigated,” Oyetibo argued.
In response, Dr. Martins explained that the reinvestigation was initiated at the instance of the first defendant’s counsel and denied any allegation of oppression.
Justice Sonaike noted that it was indeed Dr. Layonu who had earlier mentioned a letter indicating that the case required reinvestigation, but the state prosecution had not been aware at the time.
Oyetibo, however, maintained that if the defence was aware of the letter while the state was not, it raised serious procedural concerns. He stressed that since the police had already investigated the matter, the trial should commence without delay.
Consequently, Justice Sonaike adjourned the case till January 12, 2026, to enable the police to correspond with the prosecution and file a further report.
Oyetibo’s protest effectively calls on the Attorney General to halt any further police reinvestigation and allow the trial to proceed, as the defence is prepared to prove its case in court.
