Update Unfolds on Ooni’s Ex-queen,Oriyomi’s Bail Application
Ibadan Stampede: Update Emerge on Ooni’s Ex-queen, Oriyomi’s Bail Application
Fresh update has emerged on the bail of suspects arrested over Ibadan Stampede Incident which claimed nothing less than 35 children.
According to the update, Justice K. B. Olawoyin of the Oyo State High Court, Court 8, has set a new date to rule on the bail application of Naomi Silekunola, the ex-queen of the Ooni of Ife, and two others implicated .
Eagles Sight News reports that the court will deliver its verdict on Tuesday, January 13.
Naomi Silekunola, Alhaji Oriyomi Hamzat, and Abdulahi Fasasi are facing charges related to the tragic stampede that occurred during a children’s funfair in Ibadan, resulting in the loss of 35 young lives. Hamzat is the owner of Agidigbo FM, a radio station based in Ibadan, while Fasasi serves as the Principal of Islamic High School in Bashorun, Ibadan.
As fully gathered on Punch, the suspects are currently standing trial over the stampede which occurred during a Christmas funfair at Islamic High School, Bashorun, Ibadan, in December 2024.
The incident claimed the lives of no fewer than 35 children.
The bail applications were heard at the Oyo State High Court, Court 8, Ring Road, Ibadan, on Tuesday.
Counsel for the suspects had filed a summons of application for bail before the court.
After listening to the submissions and arguments of the counsel on points of law, Justice Olawoyin adjourned ruling on the bail application till Tuesday, January 13.
The suspects are currently being remanded at the Nigerian Correctional Centre Agodi
Fasasi was represented by Waheed Olajide, Ex-queen Naomi was represented by Musibau Adetunmbi (SAN) and Hamzat was represented by Adekunle Sobaloju (SAN).
The cases were argued separately by the counsel in a proceeding that lasted over five hours.
The state had also filed a counter-application against the bail of the suspects.
The state team was led by the Attorney General and Commissioner of Justice, Mr Abiodun Aikomo who led top officials of the Ministry of Justice.
All the counsel in their separate arguments told the court why their clients should be allowed to enjoy their freedom, noting that there are no sufficient evidence is before the court to warrant the confining to prison custody.