By Edith Nwapi

A Defence Counsel, Mr Farouk Akambi, on Wednesday stormed out of the FCT High Court before proceedings formally commenced in the case of alleged forgery filed against an Abuja-Lawyer, Victor Giwa and one other.

Giwa and his co- defendant, Ibitade Bukola, are charged with forging official documents and impersonating a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Awa Kalu.

At the resumed hearing of the case, the prosecution counsel, Wisdom Madaki, told Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie, that Akambi was in court but left the courtroom without informing him about where he was going.

“He left before proceedings commenced, leaving the first defendant without representation.

“The withdrawal is a deliberate attempt to stall the proceedings inspite of prior service of our response to the first defendant’s application for release of his international passport, alongside a further and better affidavit” filed on May 22, 2026.

“I showed him the document for identification and after reviewing it, he said he had no objection but insisted his motion was more important,” Madaki told the court.

He added that both defence teams were aware of the filings.

When proceedings resumed briefly, Giwa informed the court that his counsel had declined to continue with the case and that he would represent himself.

He cited urgency in his application for the release of his international passport.

Giwa also relied on his constitutional right to self-representation under Section 36(2) of the 1999 Constitution .

Ogbu Aboje represented the second defendant.

However, the prosecution urged the court to proceed in order to avoid further delay, noting that the matter was already ripe for hearing.

Justice Onwuegbuzie declined to proceed, holding that the defendant’s counsel remained on record and must account for his absence.

“I will not allow that. The first defendant has counsel. Let him come and clear the air,” the judge ruled.

He stressed that the court expected proper withdrawal procedures or communication from counsel.

The judge further observed that the defence had shown “no respect for the court” by failing to ensure representation or formally notifying the court of any change in legal strategy.

He then adjourned until June 10, for continuation of trial. (NAN)

Update news