Barrister Marshal Details Bail Application Withdrawal for Justice Crack Following Courtroom Tussle

Barrister Marshall Abubakar has broken his silence following the dramatic withdrawal of a bail application filed on behalf of detained Nigerian blogger and activist, Justice Mark Chidiebere, popularly known as Justice Crack, amid a disagreement among members of the defence team at the Federal High Court in Abuja. Following the dramatic proceedings on Thursday, Marshal, while addressing the media and other interested parties, denied harbouring any personal grievance against the detained activist and insisted that his decision to withdraw from the proceedings was taken to avoid worsening tensions within the defence team. The lawyer said he still desired justice and freedom for the activist despite the courtroom drama that stalled the bail hearing earlier in the day. “And I think it's really that time when this thing transpired, that you do not cut off your nose in order to spite one day or another person,” Marshal said. “However, the way that process is being made, you do not fight with your friends in the presence of your enemies and fight with your finishers and ammunition or destroy them. “So, it was on that basis of this conflict of interest, I mean, making a mountain out of a molehill, that I wanted today's episode to be about.” Marshal further stated that despite the disagreement among members of the legal team, he had no personal resentment toward anyone involved in the matter. “But on a personal note, I do not hold grudges, and I do not have any personal grievance against any person,” he said. “I was willing to continue with the matter despite the conflict of interest but after the decision by some of our comrades to ensure that another lawyer comes in and takes over the proceedings, forced me to willfully withdraw my appearance so that another bail application can be filed and the case can proceed on Monday. According to him, he still “wants justice for Justice Crack”. SaharaReporters had earlier reported that proceedings at the Federal High Court descended into confusion on Thursday after a disagreement erupted among lawyers representing the detained activist over courtroom appearance protocol and leadership of the defence team. The matter, presided over by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, was scheduled for the hearing of a bail application filed by Marshal on behalf of Justice Crack, who is currently being held by the Department of State Services (DSS). The bail application came amid mounting public outrage over allegations that the activist was tortured in military custody before being transferred to the DSS. Court Drama As Justice Crack’s Lawyer Withdraws Bail Application Over Dispute With Fellow Defence Counsel Trouble reportedly began after another member of the defence team, Olufemi Balogun, stood up to announce appearance for the lawyers representing the defendant. Marshal, who entered the courtroom shortly afterwards, reportedly objected and insisted that as the lawyer who filed the bail application and lead counsel, he had the right to introduce the defence team before the court. The disagreement reportedly created tension inside the courtroom, prompting Justice Abdulmalik to ask the detained activist to identify which of the lawyers he wanted to lead his defence. The judge also reportedly advised the lawyers to resolve the disagreement amicably, noting that since they were appearing for the same client, one counsel could simply announce appearance and introduce the others. Marshal, however, maintained his objection and subsequently informed the court that he would withdraw the bail application if he was not allowed to lead the proceedings. The decision reportedly surprised the court, with the judge asking whether he truly intended to withdraw all processes filed on behalf of the defendant. Following the withdrawal, the court struck out the bail application and adjourned the matter till Monday, May 18, 2026, for the hearing of a fresh application. Speaking after the proceedings, another member of the defence team identified simply as Wayne described the development as “a sad incident.” “It was on that basis that the lawyer who led the defence (Marshal) at the previous sitting withdrew his application, and all processes filed by him were subsequently struck out,” Wayne said after the proceedings. “As a result, there was nothing left before the court for consideration as of today. It was also on that basis that my Lord graciously granted a short adjournment for another bail application to be filed. “It is indeed a sad incident, a very sad one but that is the situation.”