By Opeyemi Adelakun
The Lagos State High Court has struck out an application by Eurapharma Care Services Nigeria Limited, operators of Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital, seeking to halt the coroner’s inquest into the death of Nkanu Esege, son of celebrated Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.
Justice Aishat Opesanwo delivered the ruling on Monday, rejecting the hospital’s arguments that the cremation of the deceased’s body deprived the coroner of jurisdiction and that the planned sequence for receiving evidence breached its right to a fair hearing.
The judge held that the absence of the body did not, in itself, invalidate the decision to proceed with the inquest, which she said was required by law under the circumstances.
Nkanu died on January 7, 2026, following medical procedures, prompting an inquiry into the circumstances surrounding his death.
In its application, Euracare argued that the cremation meant the body would no longer be available for a post-mortem examination, raising concerns about the basis on which the inquest could proceed.
The hospital also challenged the coroner’s decision on the order in which statements and evidence would be received from medical personnel and other parties connected to the facilities where Nkanu was treated.
However, Justice Opesanwo said Section 15 of the Coroners System Law of Lagos State 2007 imposed a statutory obligation to conduct an inquest where the specified conditions were met.
“The provision gives no room for exercise of discretion in the decision to conduct an inquest once a death results from any one of the nine situations specified, and that it occurs within the area designated as the coroner’s district,” the judge said.
She held that the hospital had not disproved the conditions that empowered the coroner to conduct the inquiry.
The judge also explained that the law did not require the deceased’s body to remain within the coroner’s district on the date of the inquest.
Rejecting the argument that cremation would make the proceedings speculative, she said she was not persuaded that the absence of the body meant the inquiry and its conclusions would necessarily be based on conjecture.
Justice Opesanwo further noted that the inquest had yet to commence formally, describing the hospital’s concerns about its eventual outcome as premature.
Inquest not a trial, judge says
The judge stressed that a coroner’s inquest was a fact-finding exercise designed to establish who died, how and when the death occurred, and where it happened.
“It is not a trial; no one is on trial in a coroner’s court,” she said, explaining that the process was inquisitorial rather than adversarial or accusatorial.
According to her, the purpose of the inquiry was not to punish any party or apportion blame, but to establish the facts surrounding the death.
On the hospital’s objection to the order in which evidence would be received, the judge held that the coroner had the discretion to determine the sequence of statements and evidence presented during the proceedings.
She ruled that the exercise of that discretion did not amount to a breach of fair hearing merely because a party disagreed with the procedure adopted.
The judge also noted that the rules of evidence and procedure governing ordinary civil proceedings did not apply in precisely the same way to a coroner’s inquest.
Following her rejection of the hospital’s arguments, Justice Opesanwo held that the respondents’ preliminary objections succeeded and struck out the substantive application.
Leave a Reply