Drama ensued on Tuesday at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Maitama judicial division when counsel to the prosecution in a matter FRN V Yahaya Adoza Bello, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, made remarks urging the trial judge, Maryann E. Anenih, to limit the time spent in delivering judgments.
Earlier in the day, Justice Anenih had delivered a judgment in a civil matter before calling the criminal case between the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Yahaya Adoza Bello, in which Pinheiro appeared as the prosecution counsel.
At the resumed proceedings, counsel to the 3rd defendant, Z. E. Abbas, was preparing to commence cross-examination of the prosecution witness when the court indicated that it would rise by 2:30p.m. The court, however, stated that it could consider granting an additional 30 minutes if counsel would be able to conclude the cross-examination within that period.
Responding, Pinheiro urged the court to extend the sitting time to enable the defence conclude the cross-examination and allow the prosecution call a fresh witness on the next adjourned date. He noted that all parties had arrived in court as early as 9:00 a.m., but proceedings were delayed because the court had to first deliver a lengthy judgment in another matter.
According to him, the parties had waited for about four hours while the court carefully read the entire judgment in open court.
Pinheiro remarked that the time taken to read the judgment was quite lengthy and compared it with the practice at the Supreme Court of Nigeria, where, according to him, only the introductory three pages and concluding portions of four pages of a judgment are usually read.
“My Lord, I was actually pitying Your Lordship while reading the entire judgment for almost four hours. At the Supreme Court, the practice is that only the first three pages and the last four pages are read during the delivery of judgment. That approach saves time and also helps to preserve the health and energy of the court,” he said.
Following the exchange, the court adjourned the matter to Wednesday and Thursday for the continuation of cross-examination and further hearing in the trial.
However, it appeared that the judge was not particularly pleased with the remarks made by the prosecution counsel, as Her Lordship directed that the matter would be placed as number two on the cause list for the following day, regardless of the earlier discussions in court.
