Alleged failed surgery: Court further adjourns trial of Lagos surgeon


A Federal High Court in Lagos on Tuesday further adjourned until November 20 to adopt written addresses in the trial of a surgeon, Anuoluwapo Adepoju, charged with alleged evasion from an investigation into a failed plastic surgery.

The case, which was scheduled for adoption of addresses on Tuesday, did not go on as earlier scheduled.

The case has, consequently, been adjourned until November.

The defendant is charged by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).

She is standing trial alongside her clinic, MedContour Services Ltd, on a five-count charge bordering on a refusal to honour an invitation for an investigation into post-body surgery complications, as well as the production of investigation documents.

She was re-arraigned on July 17, 2020, alongside her medical outfit, before Justice Mohammed Liman.

She had pleaded not guilty to the charges and was granted bail on self-recognizance.

Justice Liman was subsequently transferred out of the Lagos division of the court, but he still presides over the case on a fiat.

The trial has since commenced in the suit, and the FCCPC has also since closed its case.

The defence, on its part, filed a no-case submission for the defendant on the grounds that no case had been established against her by the prosecution to warrant her entering a defence.

Meanwhile, Justice Liman had, in a ruling delivered on April 7, 2022 rejected the no-case submission by the defendant.

He had ruled that the evidence so far tendered before the court satisfies the elements of the criminal charges pending against the defendant.

The court had then ordered the defence to open its case.

The case, however, suffered several adjournments on different dates for various reasons.

On May 5 (this year), the defence opened its case and called the first defendant as sole witness.

The defendant was led in evidence and also cross-examined, after which the court adjourned the case until June 21 for the adoption of written addresses.

On June 21, the court did not sit, and the case was then adjourned until July 17 and again adjourned until Oct. 24 (today).

In the five-count charge brought against the defendants, the prosecution alleged that the first defendant failed to appear before the FCCPC in relation to an investigation into a reported failed plastic surgery.

The defendant was alleged to have failed to show up in compliance with the commission’s summons dated April 15, 2020.

The prosecution also alleged that without sufficient cause, the first defendant also refused and failed to produce documents that she was required to produce in compliance with the commission’s notice of investigation dated April 14, 2020.

The defendant was alleged to have prevented and obstructed the commission from carrying out its investigation into the said issue.

The offences contravenes the provision of sections 11(1)(a), 33(1)(a), 110, 113(1)(a) and 159(4) of the FCCPC Act, 2018. (NAN)

Post a Comment