Fresh legal arguments have stalled proceedings in the coroner’s inquest into the death of 21-month-old Nkanu Adichie-Esege, the son of acclaimed Nigerian novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and her husband, Dr. Ivara Esege.
The Coroner’s Court sitting at the J.I.C. Taylor Courthouse in the Igbosere area of Lagos Island on Wednesday adjourned the matter until October 8, 2026, following the emergence of a High Court order temporarily halting the inquest.
Presiding Coroner, Magistrate Atinuke Adetunji, fixed the new date after being informed that the Lagos State High Court had granted a stay of proceedings pending the determination of a judicial review application challenging the legality of the inquest.
The case, which was expected to proceed with the commencement of witness testimony, instead became the focus of intense legal arguments over whether the Coroner’s Court has the authority to investigate the circumstances surrounding the child’s death.
Representing Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Professor Taiwo Osipitan, informed the court that his client had approached the High Court to challenge the jurisdiction of the Coroner’s Court.
According to Osipitan, a central issue in the judicial review proceedings is whether the inquest can lawfully continue after the deceased child’s body had allegedly been cremated before the commencement of the investigation.
He argued that the judicial review application seeks clarification on whether the court can determine the cause of death without the physical body being available for examination.
One of the major questions before the High Court, he said, is whether the Coroner’s Court properly assumed jurisdiction under the circumstances.
Osipitan disclosed that Justice Aishat Opesanwo of the Lagos State High Court granted Euracare leave on May 26, 2026, to pursue judicial review proceedings through orders of certiorari and prohibition.
“There is also a consequential order that pending the determination of our substantive suit, this Coroner’s Court be stayed,” Osipitan told the court.
“We have a return date of June 8, 2026. We have served all parties and our prayer is that this court should defer the proceedings until we come back, in obedience to the order.”
However, counsel representing the Lagos State Attorney-General’s Office, Adebola Araba, informed the court that he had not personally seen a copy of the order being referenced.
Responding, Osipitan maintained that the Attorney-General’s office had already been served with the necessary court documents.
“We filed on Monday and served the Attorney-General’s office yesterday. He may not personally have seen it, but the office has been served,” he said.
Counsel to the deceased child’s family, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Kemi Pinheiro, informed the court that preparations for the hearing had already advanced significantly.
According to him, the family had filed and served four witness statements on oath ahead of the scheduled proceedings.
Pinheiro revealed that the witnesses include the child’s father, Dr. Ivara Esege; Dr. Chinwe Ego, a medical expert based in Arizona, United States; another medical specialist from Minnesota; and Professor Adekola of the Lagos University Teaching Hospital.
“For the record, we have served everybody,” Pinheiro stated, adding that he only sought confirmation that all parties, including Euracare’s legal team, had received the documents in line with due process requirements.
While acknowledging the need to respect the High Court’s order, Pinheiro insisted that the search for answers surrounding the child’s death should ultimately continue through the inquest process.
“He who has nothing to hide should not fear an open inquest. An innocent man has nothing to fear. It is darkness that fears the light,” he argued.
The senior lawyer also urged the court to grant a definite adjournment date after the judicial review proceedings rather than postponing the matter indefinitely.
Counsel representing Atlantis Pediatric Hospital, Efe Ize-Iyamu, also confirmed that his client had been served with both the enrolled order and the originating motion filed before the High Court.
He aligned himself with the position taken by the family’s counsel, stating that while all parties were bound by the stay order, Atlantis Pediatric Hospital had already filed the necessary legal responses.
In a brief reply, Osipitan maintained that the key legal issue remained the alleged cremation of the child’s remains before the activation of the coroner’s jurisdiction.
“Whether you are fearful or fearless, there was wilful destruction.
“You cannot assume jurisdiction. What they did is punishable by 15 years imprisonment.
”The issue is whether somebody who has done something wrong under the law can push for an inquest, ” hr said.
Pinheiro strongly disagreed with that interpretation, describing the argument as legally flawed and inconsistent with provisions of the Coroner’s Law.
“We will demonstrate instances where inquests have been conducted even without the body,” he responded.
After listening to submissions from all parties, Magistrate Adetunji ruled that proceedings would remain suspended pending developments at the High Court and subsequently adjourned the matter until October 8, 2026.
The latest development added another layer of legal complexity to a case that has drawn significant public attention, as the family continues to seek answers regarding the circumstances surrounding the death of their young son while legal questions over jurisdiction remain unresolved.
