The ongoing paternity dispute involving former Special Duties and Inter-Governmental Affairs Minister Kabiru Turaki hit a dramatic turn on Tuesday, as a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Nyanya reprimanded the ex-minister’s lawyer, Khalit Jatau, for requesting a “frivolous” adjournment.
Justice Aliyu Shafa, presiding over the case, expressed dissatisfaction after Jatau informed the court that he had been misinformed about the status of the case, which had led to his unpreparedness. The case, which revolves around accusations of defamation and paternity, has attracted significant public interest due to the prominent figures involved.
“I was informed by my client that the matter had been transferred to Kwali High Court and rescheduled for March 27,” Jatau explained. “I came here to verify at the registry, only to be told the matter would be heard today before Justice Shafa. Due to this confusion, I am not adequately prepared to proceed.”
Justice Shafa was quick to respond, noting that the only authority to reassign a case to another court lies with the chief judge. “This situation is not acceptable, and you need to put your house in order before the next adjourned date,” he told Jatau.
The case was adjourned until March 18 for hearing, but the tension in the courtroom was palpable as the defense lawyer, Sani Idriss, voiced his surprise at the developments.
The paternity dispute centers on allegations made by a woman, Uwani Arabi, and her family. Turaki, who served as a minister in the past administration, has been accused of fathering a child through Arabi’s daughter, Hadiza. The case has taken on a life of its own, with the former minister seeking damages from the family over what he claims are defamatory statements.
Turaki has insisted that the allegations against him are unfounded and that the family had fabricated the story in an attempt to discredit him. He maintains that he had no sexual involvement with Hadiza and that his relationship with the family deteriorated after he severed ties with them following her alleged criminal activities.
“I am the one who took responsibility for Hadiza’s education at Baze University, Abuja,” Turaki said in his affidavit. “I helped her financially and supported her mother as well. I never committed the acts they are accusing me of. It’s only after I stopped allowing Hadiza to visit me that these false accusations began.”
In response, Arabi, Hadiza, and her ex-husband, Musa Baffa, have denied defaming the ex-minister. They claim that Turaki was the one who initiated and paid for Hadiza’s education. Furthermore, they contend that the former minister had been sexually inappropriate with Hadiza and took advantage of her, leading to the pregnancy.
According to their defense, the defendants argue that the claim of defamation is baseless. “None of us have defamed Turaki. Instead, it is he who breached our trust and damaged our family’s reputation,” the defense statement reads. “We believe the only way to resolve this matter is through a DNA test, and we are willing to provide all necessary evidence, including voice messages, chats, and medical reports, to prove our claims.”
The case also highlights a deeper issue regarding the role of DNA testing in resolving paternity disputes. Both parties have emphasized the importance of conducting a DNA test to settle the matter once and for all. In fact, the defense claims that investigators have expressed similar views, suggesting that a DNA test is the only way to conclusively determine whether Turaki is the father of Hadiza’s child.
“The police investigation officers agree that a DNA test is essential to clear up this matter,” the defense further stated.
Justice Shafa had earlier ruled on a separate motion in October 2024, where Turaki sought a restraining order to prevent the family from making further public statements about the paternity dispute. The court rejected the request, stating that the motion was premature and that the case should proceed to trial.
In that ruling, Justice Shafa emphasized that granting the order would essentially involve deciding the core issue of the case before the trial had even begun. “Granting this application at this stage would mean deciding the substantive case prematurely,” the judge stated at the time.
The dispute between Turaki and the Arabi-Baffa family has captured the public’s attention due to the involvement of a former high-ranking government official and the serious nature of the allegations being made. Both sides have accused each other of defamation, and the case has become a bitter public battle.
As the legal proceedings continue, many Nigerians are closely watching the case, particularly in light of the allegations of sexual impropriety and the potential impact on Turaki’s reputation. The court’s decision to proceed with accelerated hearings, as well as the reprimand directed at the lawyer, has only heightened the drama surrounding the case.
Legal experts suggest that the outcome of the case could have significant implications for how paternity disputes are handled in Nigerian courts, particularly when public figures are involved. Additionally, the case serves as a reminder of the challenges in proving paternity and the increasing reliance on DNA testing in such matters.
For now, the paternity dispute remains unresolved, with both sides bracing for the next phase of the legal battle. As the case continues to unfold, the court’s actions will likely shape the future of paternity-related litigation in the country.
Justice Shafa’s firm stance on ensuring that the case proceeds without further delays signals the court’s determination to address the matter swiftly and fairly. Whether or not a resolution will be reached in the coming months remains to be seen, but for now, the drama surrounding the former minister’s paternity case shows no signs of abating.
