Cremation Controversy: Can Justice Survive Without an Autopsy in Chimamanda Adichie’s Son’s Death?

The adjourned inquest into the death of 21-month-old Nkanu Nnamdi Esege has now taken a troubling turn. The revelation that the child was cremated means the court may be left without the most fundamental safeguard in any suspicious child death investigation: an independent autopsy.

From a child safeguarding perspective, this development raises difficult but necessary questions. An autopsy is not a procedural technicality. It is a protective tool. It establishes medical facts, separates error from complication, and ensures that systems learn from failure.

Where a young child dies following medical intervention, the standard of scrutiny must be even higher. Without primary forensic evidence, the inquest risks relying heavily on hospital documentation and competing expert testimony.

That gap matters beyond this single case. Child protection within healthcare depends on transparency, documentation and independent review. If deaths following medical procedures cannot be thoroughly examined because foundational evidence is unavailable, future accountability may be weakened.

Hospitals must preserve records. Regulators must ensure reporting protocols are clear. Families must be properly guided on the legal implications of post-death decisions in cases under potential investigation.

The Lagos State Government has framed this inquest as a matter of public concern. It is. Every child has the right to safe medical care and to systems that respond rigorously when outcomes go wrong. Safeguarding does not end with treatment. It extends to how deaths are investigated, how lessons are identified, and how standards are strengthened.

The question is, can truth still be found even when protection measures have failed.