The ongoing corruption trial involving the immediate past National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, his wife Dr. Hafsat Umar Ganduje, and six others, suffered another setback on Monday at the Kano State High Court.
The Kano State Public Complaints and Anti-Corruption Commission (PCACC) had filed an 11-count charge against the defendants over alleged bribery, conspiracy, and diversion of public funds amounting to several billions of naira.
Those standing trial alongside the former Kano State governor and his wife include Abubakar Bawuro, Umar Abdullahi Umar, Jibrilla Muhammad, Lamash Properties Limited, Safari Textiles Limited, and Lasage General Enterprises Limited.
The case, which was scheduled for the prosecution to open with witness testimony, was stalled after the defendants’ counsel declared their unpreparedness to proceed.
Earlier, Adeola Adedipe (SAN), lead counsel to the state government, informed Justice Amina Adamu Aliyu that the prosecution was ready to present its witnesses, who were already seated in court.
However, defence counsel Lydia Oluwakemi-Oyewo, representing Ganduje, his wife, and son, objected to the commencement of the hearing, claiming that her clients were not properly served with the notice of hearing.
She subsequently filed a motion on notice urging the court to stay proceedings, arguing that the matter was already before the Court of Appeal.
Similarly, other defence lawyers, Chief M. N. Duru (SAN) for the 3rd defendant, Sunusi Musa (SAN) for the 5th, Abubakar Ahmad for the 6th, and Abdulrazaq A. Ahmed for the 8th, informed the court of their pending applications for stay of proceedings and preliminary objections.
They all maintained that the trial could not proceed until those motions were heard.
In response, prosecution counsel Adedipe urged the court to dismiss the applications, accusing the defence of deliberate delay tactics meant to frustrate the trial.
He appealed to the court to allow the case to proceed concurrently with the pending motions, suggesting that rulings on the motions could be deferred until the substantive matter concluded.
Justice Aliyu, however, disagreed, ruling that all preliminary objections must be resolved before the substantive trial could commence.
She also dismissed the defence’s request for a stay of execution, stating that the court lacked grounds to halt proceedings in the absence of a direct order of reference.
The judge subsequently adjourned the case to November 26, 2025, for the hearing of all pending applications.
