Court Rejects Application Seeking To Stop Journalists From Covering Proceedings.
Justice Akinkunmi Idowu of a Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja has refused an application seeking to prevent journalists from covering and reporting an ongoing case involving an alleged attempt to forcefully take over a parcel of land belonging to a renowned medical doctor and international consultant, Dr Ojo Ademola Oluwatosin, in Lagos.
The Judge dismissed the application filed by the defendant’s counsel, Mr Kehinde Akerele, which requested the Court to caution the claimant against using the media to publish reports on the court’s proceedings.
Justice Idowu noted that the Court does not have the power to restrain the media from covering court proceedings, particularly if the reporting is accurate and reflects what transpired in court.
- Advertisement -
The Court held that journalists have a constitutional duty to report on open court proceedings.
The claimant’s counsel, Dr Adekunle Ojo (SAN), denied using the media to publish Court proceedings.
Oluwatosin had filed the suit marked No: LD/15415LMW/24 against Starmark Finance Company Limited, Stephen Ajibade-Abisuga, Tunju Solaja, and Engineer Peter Omotosho, as the first to fourth respondents respectively.
The claimant is seeking to restrain the defendants from taking over his land located in Lekki, Lagos.
At the last adjourned date, Dr Ojo (SAN) informed the court of an application dated February 19, requesting the withdrawal of the law firm of the Attorney-General of Lagos State and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Lawal Pedro (SAN), from handling the suit.
The application was based on the claim of a conflict of interest, as the law firm representing the first defendant in the suit could not do so due to the Attorney General’s involvement.
The claimant is asking the court to set aside the order granting a change of counsel for the first defendant to the law firm of Lawal Pedro (SAN) & Associates, which was made on February 18, 2025.
In the Motion on Notice, the claimant hinged his application on the ground that “the office of the Attorney General had earlier issued a DPP advice against the party his private law firm, Lawal Pedro (SAN) & Associates, now seeks to represent.”
The claimant further alleged that the first defendant, as represented by Pedro and Associates, withheld information from the court, stating that the Attorney General is the principal partner and founder of Lawal Pedro (SAN) & Associates, and had previously issued a DPP’s advice criminally indicting the company and recommending its prosecution.
Counsel to the first respondent, Mr Kehinde Akerele, in his response, informed the court that he had two pending applications, which had been duly served on all parties.
Akerele stated that the application dated April 7 sought the court’s leave to change the address of service for the first respondent.
The claimant’s counsel requested time to study and respond to the applications.
Justice Idowu adjourned the case to May 20, 2025, for the claimant’s counsel to file his response and for the hearing of the matter.
