A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on January 21, 2026, halted proceedings in the high-profile criminal trial of former Oyo State Park Management System chairman, Mukaila Lamidi, widely known as Auxiliary, after medical evidence presented in court declared him unfit to continue due to serious health concerns.
The adjournment followed sworn testimony by Auxiliary’s physician, who informed the court that the defendant is suffering from multiple medical complications, including hypertension and stress-related conditions, which require sustained treatment and at least one month of uninterrupted rest. The doctor warned that continuing the trial without allowing time for recovery could worsen his condition and compromise his ability to meaningfully participate in his defense.
Presiding judge, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, accepted the medical report and adjourned the case until February 21, 2026, effectively granting Auxiliary a one-month medical reprieve. The court maintained that the adjournment was based strictly on medical grounds and not a suspension of the charges. Auxiliary remains on bail under existing conditions, including restrictions on movement and continued court supervision.
Auxiliary, once one of the most feared and powerful figures in Oyo State’s transport sector, is facing a raft of serious criminal charges, including conspiracy, attempted murder, illegal possession of firearms, and alleged involvement in cult-related violence. Prosecutors allege that the offenses are connected to years of violent turf wars, extortion, and intimidation linked to motor park control across the state.
His arrest in 2025 marked a dramatic collapse of a power structure that had thrived for years within Oyo’s transport unions, often accused by residents and civil society groups of operating with impunity. Once seen as untouchable, Auxiliary’s fall symbolized the Makinde administration’s crackdown on political enforcers and park-related violence.
The court’s decision has triggered sharply divided reactions. Supporters argue that the ruling reflects basic respect for human rights and due process, insisting that no defendant should be forced to stand trial while medically unfit. Critics, however, view the development with deep suspicion, accusing the defense of deploying health claims as a familiar tactic to delay justice and exhaust public interest in the case. Transport workers and victims of park violence have expressed frustration, warning that repeated adjournments risk undermining accountability.
Legal observers note that Nigerian courts are increasingly caught between two competing imperatives: safeguarding a defendant’s constitutional right to health and fair trial, and responding to public demands for swift justice in cases involving alleged violence and abuse of power. The Auxiliary case sits squarely at that fault line.
The February hearing date now looms as a critical test. If Auxiliary returns medically cleared, the trial is expected to resume in full. If not, pressure will intensify on the court to determine how long health-related delays can be accommodated without eroding confidence in the justice system.
For now, the court has spoken clearly: the former parks boss gets time to recover. Whether that pause serves justice or merely postpones it is a question many in Oyo State are asking—and watching closely.