Former Nigerian First Lady, Patience Jonathan, is at the centre of a lingering legal controversy involving 15 of her former domestic workers who have been held in detention since 2019 over allegations of theft and conspiracy.
The workers are accused of stealing valuables worth an estimated N200 million from the former First Lady’s residence.
IREPORT247NEWS reported that the alleged stolen items include seven gold bangles, assorted jewellery, five Samsung air conditioners, two sets of upholstered chairs, and six Samsung flat-screen televisions. In addition to theft, the accused are facing 18 criminal charges, including conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to commit felony, and burglary.
Since their arraignment in 2019, the trial of the domestic workers has been repeatedly delayed, with the case suffering no fewer than 40 adjournments. The most recent hearings, which were scheduled for 25th and 26th June 2025, could not proceed due to the kidnap of Justice Ebiyerin Omukoro of the Bayelsa State High Court on 21st June.
The judge was abducted in Yenagoa, the Bayelsa State capital, in front of an eatery, further compounding the delay in the trial process.
READ ALSO: NCoS Denies Illegally Detaining Patience Jonathan’s ex-Aides
Reacting to the situation, a legal practitioner, Funmi Adedoyin, expressed deep concern over the prolonged detention and the slow pace of justice. Speaking with The Punch, she said, “We are deeply concerned about these incessant delays. That is why we are actively engaging in legal advocacy to ensure justice is not only done but seen to be done. Over 40 adjournments in one case is disheartening.”
She added, “The last sitting was supposed to be on 26th and 27th June, but the court didn’t sit because of the solidarity action taken by the judiciary in Bayelsa following the kidnapping of one of their own. Read here. Sadly, we have not been able to get a new hearing date since then. This prolonged uncertainty is an injustice in itself.”
High Court Judge Abducted by Gunmen
Abducted Bayelsa High Court Judge Regains Freedom
In the wake of public concerns sparked by media reports, the Bayelsa State High Court issued an official statement clarifying the status of the case.
Julius L. Nyananyo, Head of Media and Information of the Bayelsa State High Court, in a statement released in early April 2025, addressed a report titled “Ex-Nigerian First Lady Patience Jonathan Holds 15 Domestic Workers in Prison over Missing Jewellery” published by an online news outlet on 3rd April.
The statement reads, “The attention of the Bayelsa State High Court has been drawn to a media report misrepresenting the facts surrounding the ongoing trial involving the domestic staff of the former First Lady. As a responsible judicial institution, we are compelled to correct any misconceptions in the interest of justice and balanced reportage.”
The court emphasized that the case is currently being heard at High Court 1, presided over by Hon. Justice Matilda Ayemieye, who is also the Chief Judge of Bayelsa State.
According to the statement, “His Lordship granted accelerated hearing to expedite proceedings. However, delays have occurred due to the presence of multiple defence counsel, each of whom must cross-examine witnesses, thereby extending the trial duration.”
The court also noted that a recent application for a trial within a trial — a judicial procedure to determine the admissibility of certain pieces of evidence — was granted, a process that further contributed to the delay in substantive hearings.
Despite these setbacks, Adedoyin reaffirmed her legal team’s commitment to pursuing justice for the detained workers. “We will continue to advocate for the swift administration of justice in this matter.
“Our expectation is that with continued advocacy and public attention, the court will resume proceedings without further unnecessary delays so that justice can finally be served,” she stated.
READ MORE- Patience Jonathan Missing Jewelries: Court Delays Case
The prolonged detention of the 15 accused persons, without substantive progress in the trial, has drawn criticism from human rights advocates and members of the public, who have urged the judiciary to prioritize the case in accordance with the principle of fair hearing and timely justice.