1. Abdul Kpaka was charged on the 27th of August, 2024.

2. He was deprived of the regular preliminaryary hearing ar the magistrate court and sent straight to High Court using section 136 of the old CPA. According to law, if sufficient evidence is not established at the preliminary hearing, no matter the allegation, the matter/defendant will be discharged. It’s possible that Abdul Kpaka would have gotten a discharged if the evidence suggests so. But he was deprived that opportunity.

3. Kpaka appeared before Justice Stevens in September 2024;

4. Justice Stevens despite the prosecution’s defiance, and even quoting a recent supreme court ruling (precedent), ended up ruling for a judge alone trial instead of a judge and jury. He claimed that in the interest of justice and expeditious trial he will sit alone on Kpaka’s case without a jury, contrary to law and a recent supreme court order. He even promised to finish the matter in less than two months;

Related News

5. Justice Stevens went ahead to deny bail and banned the defense from even asking for bail in his court. He made this ruling when the defense had not even requested for bail. He further made other rulings that were illegal according to the defense.

6. The defense went to Supreme Cour for redress and inquiry into what they deemed unfair and illegal. This was around November 2024;

7. The Supreme Court hearing lasted for about a month;

8. On 17th December 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that Justice Stevens showed bias against the defendant Abdul Kpaka and passed wrong rulings in the matter. They further ruled that the matter be removed from him and reassigned to a new judge and should now proceed with a judge and jury as prescribed by law and not judge alone;

9. In January 2025, the matter was assigned to Justice Ganda. Kpaka started appearing before Justice Ganda around January and February in 2025.

10. The first jury (12 men and women) was empaneled and the matter was deemed ready to proceed expeditiously;

11. The State was expected to expedite their case as they earlier claimed overwhelming evidence, hence using 136 to send the matter straight to High Court without preliminary hearing. Note: at the first hearing, the high court hearing before Justice Momoh Jah Stevens, the state already presented 9 witnesses and was ready to proceed with the 10th when the supreme court placed a stay, pending their inquiry and final resolution (s);

12. For about eight to nine months, the state was either absent in court or present without a witness. They only managed to produce two witnesses after the empanelment of three set of jury. Those two witnesses were only presented after the judge ruled that the matter will be thrown out if the state prosecution fails to present a witness at the next adjourned date;

13. In September 2025, when the new CPA was introduced, the prosecution quickly applied for the jurors to be removed and the matter to proceed with a judge alone. The defense argued otherwise, reminding the judge that this was an exclusive matter with specific instruction (ruling) from the Supreme court. But the judge ruled in favour of the prosecution and decided to sit alone on the matter;

14. After that ruling, the prosecution started bringing at least a witness or two in each hearing;

15. The prosecution, after presenting about 10 witnesses, finally closed their case in February 2026.

16. The defense opened their case proper in March 2026, in the beginning of the defense’s case, they requested that the accused’s phone which was in police custody be handed to the defense since the prosecution did not present it in court. The defense told the court that they have a crucial evidence in the said phone which they wish to show and submit to the court. The state also asked for the CCTV footage at the emergency hospital where Sia was declared dead.

17. For nearly two months, the defense (Kpaka’s lawyers) did not get the phone from the police. They had to come back to inform the judge, and the judge asked the state counsel to help the defense get the phone. Eventually, the phone was handed to the defense around April or so. As for the CCTV footage, the emergency hospital told the court on writing that they had long ago deleted the footage due to storage constraints;

18. While trying to present his own phone and its content in his defense, the prosecution objected, claiming that he (Kpaka) is not fit to present his own phone. They asked for the primary source of what he was about to present in audio-visual form;

19. The judge ruled that Kpaka couldn’t present his own phone and that it’s the IT people in court who were fit to make such a presentation;

20. An application was made for the deceased phone to ascertain the materials Kpaka claimed came from her email. It took the defense again another 3 weeks or so to get it from the police. When they came with it again, the prosecution claimed that the defense is not fit to present the phone.

21. There have been endless adjournments on legal arguments, absence of the prosecution (especially between February and September 2025), or no availability of a witness or witnesses. Note: this was when jurors were part of the matter. The court also has its share cut in the endless adjournments through the judiciary’s calendar and activities (vacation period, court training programs for judges, special occasions at the court’s premises, and public holidays)

22. The defense and the defendant to the best of my knowledge have been present in each and every adjourned date, ready to proceed. They’ve even severally begged the judge to call the matter two or three times a week so that it would be expedited. But the state prosecutor on the other hand, vehemently opposed to that, claiming that he has a tight schedule in other courts on other days and will be available only on Wednesdays.

From what you’ve just read above, who is responsible for the delay in Kpaka’s trial?