Forensic and legal experts have called for the expanded use of coroner’s inquests as a strategic tool to strengthen Nigeria’s criminal justice system, arguing that the mechanism can uncover the truth behind suspicious deaths, enhance accountability and complement criminal prosecutions.

The call was made on the third day of the 2026 Global Forensic Summit held in Lagos, where stakeholders examined the role of forensic science, criminal intelligence and coroner’s courts in addressing persistent gaps in investigations and justice delivery.

Speakers noted that many Nigerians are often reluctant to report suspicious deaths due to fear of harassment or prolonged engagement with law enforcement agencies.

Founder and Director of the International Academy of Forensics (IAF), Dr. Damilola Fagboro and Court Assessor with the Lagos State Judicial Service Commission and Coroner, Oyetade Komolafe highlighted provisions of the Coroner’s Law that protect citizens reporting suspicious deaths.

They emphasised that existing legal frameworks provide alternative reporting channels that allow citizens to initiate cases without immediate direct contact with the police.

According to the experts, such cases can be reported through designated medical and forensic institutions, including the Department of Pathology at the Lagos State University Teaching Hospital (LASUTH), where reports can be formally documented and escalated for investigation.

They explained that coroner’s courts possess powers similar to magistrate courts, including the authority to summon witnesses, compel the production of evidence and take testimony under oath.

Importantly, inquests serve a distinct purpose from criminal trials, focusing on establishing the circumstances surrounding deaths and making findings that may guide subsequent legal actions.

A major highlight of the discussions was the distinction between the medical cause of death and the legal determination of the manner of death.

While forensic pathologists establish the biological cause, coroners are tasked with determining how the death occurred and whether any person or institution bears responsibility.

Participants referenced high-profile cases such as the coroner’s inquest into the Synagogue Church of All Nations (SCOAN) guesthouse collapse and the Dana Air crash, noting that such inquiries helped establish facts, identify negligence and drive institutional accountability.

Fagboro, stressed that while forensic science is increasingly indispensable, courts remain the ultimate gatekeepers of admissibility.

Presenting a paper titled “Reality of Forensic Investigation and Criminal Intelligence in the Age of Technological Advancement,” Fagboro said forensic practitioners must meet strict legal thresholds before their evidence can be admitted.

“The law is the gatekeeper of forensic evidence. It determines whether evidence is admitted and whether a practitioner is qualified to testify as an expert.”

 

He added that academic qualifications alone do not automatically confer expert status, noting that relevance, competence and case-specific factors often carry greater weight in court proceedings.

 

Fagboro also challenged misconceptions about criminal intelligence, explaining that intelligence is not merely collected but generated through a structured process involving data gathering, evaluation, analysis and validation.

 

According to him, the primary goal of criminal intelligence is prevention rather than post-crime reaction.

 

He further underscored that forensic reports must be truthful, fair and actionable to assist courts in reaching informed decisions.

 

Expanding on the operational framework of inquests, Komolafe highlighted provisions of the Coroner’s Law that protect citizens reporting suspicious deaths.

 

“If you wish to avoid direct police contact, you can report the matter to the Department of Pathology at LASUTH and speak with the Chief Medical Examiner, who will log the report without threat of arrest,” Komolafe explained.

 

He noted that while law enforcement agencies may become involved as investigations progress, the legal framework shields citizens from unnecessary intimidation at the reporting stage.

 

Komolafe argued that coroner’s courts possess unique procedural flexibility that allows them to overcome technical bottlenecks that often frustrate criminal trials.

 

“The Coroner’s Law removes these bottlenecks, meaning a lawyer cannot use technical manoeuvres to suppress vital facts.” He added that coroners can accept written depositions from distant witnesses and continue inquiries even where related criminal cases collapse on technical grounds.

 

The session also featured robust engagement from participants, who raised concerns about public confidence in the justice system and the role of other agencies in death investigations.

 

Responding to a question, Komolafe clarified that references to the police in the Coroner’s Law do not exclude other specialised agencies.

 

He noted that forensic experts cut across disciplines, citing engineers under the Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN) as key players in structural failure investigations.

 

He added that agencies such as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) may be involved depending on the nature of the case.

 

The discussion also reflected broader public frustration with delays in criminal trials. One participant recounted a decade-long unresolved murder case despite the existence of evidence, expressing a loss of faith in the justice system.

 

In response, Komolafe emphasised the constitutional principle of presumption of innocence, warning against allowing public sentiment to override legal safeguards.

 

“The court can only act on the facts presented before it, backed strictly by the rules of law and evidence,” he said, stressing that judges cannot manufacture evidence or compensate for weak prosecutions.

 

He further reassured participants that citizens bear no financial burden for forensic experts engaged during inquests, as such costs are covered by statutory provisions.

 

Clarifying terminology, he explained that while a coroner is the judicial officer presiding over proceedings, the inquest refers to the legal process itself.

 

They therefore called for stronger institutional support for forensic investigations, increased public awareness of reporting channels under the Coroner’s Law and deeper collaboration among legal, medical, engineering and law enforcement stakeholders to strengthen justice delivery in Nigeria.