The planned arraignment of Nollywood actress Doris Ogala before a Federal High Court in Lagos was on Thursday stalled after she failed to appear in court, raising fresh questions over the high-profile cyberstalking case involving a popular cleric.
Ogala is facing a four-count charge brought by the Federal Government over alleged cyberstalking of Pastor Chris Okafor. The charges include publishing personal materials without consent, spreading false information, cyberbullying, and attempted extortion.
The case, which has attracted public attention due to the personalities involved and the nature of the allegations, was scheduled for arraignment before Justice Akintayo Aluko. However, proceedings could not go on as planned because the defendant was absent.
When the matter was called, the prosecuting counsel, Tolulope Mokuola, informed the court that Ogala was not present despite being served with a hearing notice. He urged the court to issue a bench warrant to compel her to appear.
“My Lord, the defendant is absent despite being duly served,” Mokuola said. “We respectfully apply for a bench warrant to compel her attendance.”
But the defence counsel, Temiloluwa Akindayini, opposed the request. He told the court that his client could not attend because she had recently undergone surgery and was still recovering.
According to him, the actress had a surgical procedure on April 21, 2026, just two days before the hearing. He added that she is currently in Abia State and is not fit to travel.
“My Lord, the defendant is indisposed,” Akindayini said. “She underwent surgery and is recuperating. An affidavit to this effect has already been filed before this Honourable Court.”
The defence position, however, did not go unchallenged. The prosecutor argued that the defence failed to follow proper procedure by not serving the affidavit on the prosecution and not informing them ahead of time.
“My Lord, we were not served with the affidavit,” Mokuola said. “There was no prior notice regarding any medical condition. The hearing notice gave enough time to notify both the court and the prosecution.”
He also raised doubts about the medical report presented by the defence, noting that it was not issued by a government hospital, which he described as the standard requirement for such claims.
“The medical report is not from a government hospital,” he added. “There is no clear way to verify its authenticity.”
Justice Aluko, in his remarks, acknowledged the concerns raised by the prosecution and pointed out lapses on the part of the defence. He noted that proper procedures should have been followed, especially in a matter of this nature.
“The defence ought to have properly notified the prosecution and ensured service of the relevant processes,” the judge said.
Despite these observations, the court declined to grant the request for a bench warrant. Justice Aluko said that in the interest of justice, the defendant should be given the benefit of the doubt, particularly since an affidavit had already been filed before the court.
The decision means that Ogala will not face immediate arrest over her absence, but the court made it clear that stricter conditions would apply going forward.
Following the ruling, the prosecution urged the court to take further steps to prevent delays in the case. Mokuola asked the judge to direct that any future medical report presented by the defence must come from a government hospital. He also requested that the defence be held accountable if the defendant fails to appear at the next hearing.
“My Lord, we urge the court to insist on a verifiable medical report and to hold the defence responsible if the defendant is absent at the next sitting,” he said.
In his ruling, Justice Aluko agreed with this position. He directed that Ogala must present a detailed and verifiable medical report from a government hospital and ensure it is served on the prosecution before the next court date.
“The defendant shall present a verifiable medical report from a government hospital,” the judge ruled. “She must also ensure that the report is served on the prosecution.”
He further ordered that the actress must be present in court at the next hearing for her arraignment.
The case was subsequently adjourned to June 9, 2026.
The charges against Ogala stem from alleged actions that took place between September 2024 and March 2026. According to the Federal Government, the actress used social media platforms to publish indecent images and materials relating to Pastor Okafor without his consent.
The prosecution claims that these actions were intended to embarrass and damage the reputation of the cleric, who is the founder of a popular church.
Ogala is also accused of making serious allegations against the pastor, including claims that he raped his wife, engaged in ritual practices, and was responsible for another person’s death. Prosecutors described these claims as false and said they were made to intimidate and harm the complainant.
The case also involves allegations that the actress circulated electronic messages and videos aimed at harassing and bullying the pastor. These materials were said to have spread widely across blogs and social media, attracting public attention and debate.
In the fourth count, the Federal Government accused Ogala of attempted extortion. It alleged that she threatened to continue publishing damaging content unless she received money or was given a house.
The charges against Ogala are based on provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024. The law criminalises the use of electronic communication to spread false information, harass individuals, or damage reputations.
For now, attention will shift to the next hearing in June, when the court is expected to proceed with the arraignment if the defendant appears as ordered.