A Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja on Monday dismissed an application by Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital seeking to stop a coroner’s inquest into the death of Nkanu Esege, the 21-month-old son of renowned author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and her husband, Ivara Esege.
Delivering the ruling, Justice Aishat Opesanwo struck out the hospital’s application for orders of certiorari and prohibition, holding that the suit was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature, jurisdiction and proceedings of a coroner’s court.
The judge held that, under Section 15(2) of the Lagos State Coroner’s System Law 2007, an inquest is mandatory in cases involving a death in custody occurring within a medical facility.
She also rejected the hospital’s argument that the cremation of the child’s body and its subsequent unavailability deprived the coroner of jurisdiction. According to the court, jurisdiction is determined by the circumstances and location of the death, not by whether a body is physically available during the proceedings.
Justice Opesanwo further emphasised that a coroner’s inquest is a fact-finding exercise aimed at establishing who died and how, when and where the death occurred. It is not a criminal or civil trial intended to determine liability or punish any party.
Nkanu Esege died on January 7, 2026, at Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital in Lagos. Following his death, his parents accused the hospital of medical negligence, alleging that an excessive dose of sedatives and a lack of oxygen contributed to cardiac arrest.
The hospital, however, has maintained that the child arrived at its facility in critical condition and that its medical personnel provided care in accordance with standard medical protocols.
Following the Lagos State Government’s decision to initiate a coroner’s inquest into the circumstances surrounding the toddler’s death, Euracare approached the High Court to challenge the proceedings.
The hospital argued that conducting an inquest without the body being available for a post-mortem examination could lead to speculative conclusions and waste public resources. It also contended that requiring its medical personnel to present evidence first violated its right to a fair hearing under Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution.
In addressing the objections, Justice Opesanwo explained that a coroner’s court does not operate like a conventional civil or criminal court, where strict rules of evidence and procedures governing the burden of proof apply.
“A coroner’s inquest is a fact-finding inquiry… It is not a trial. No one is on trial in a coroner’s court. Unlike other courts—whether civil or criminal—there is no claimant, prosecution, or defence,” the judge stated.
The court also held that the coroner has statutory discretion to determine the order in which witnesses and evidence are presented. It added that judicial review should not be used to prematurely terminate proceedings mandated by state law.
With the dismissal of Euracare’s application, the coroner’s inquest into the circumstances surrounding the toddler’s death is expected to proceed.
