FG's libel pursuits to take a break?

Judging the way the medical condition of the First Gentleman is being reported by the media, the courts handling FG's libel suits may have to grant a furlough, since the private complaint would not be able to attend, much less testify in the hearings.
Procedurally however, the judicial furlough would notcome unless there is a motion to that effect.
The prosecutor must file a motion to cancel or evensuspend the hearings, in the absence of the privatecomplainant who is medically indisposed.
Attached to the motion should be a duly notarizedmedical certificate issued by the attending phycisian.
Certainly, the court cannot rely on newspaper accounts on the health of a "private" indiviudual litigant,such news reports being hearsay.
But we really do not know if this would be the path to be taken by the prosecution.
It would not be unwise for the defense to object to any anticipated motion for postponement by theprosecution.
The accused has the constitutional right to a speedy trial.
The defense can ask that the trial proceed by callingother prosecution witnesses to the witness stand,while the testimony of the private complainant be placed in the "freezer" in the meantime.
We must note that the wheels of justice did not stall,even if one of the accused is suffering from cancer,and is undergoing medical treatment.
It would be preferable if the proceedings continue by calling other witnesses.
By the time all the other witnesses are through, it can be reasonably assumed that the private complainant would already be healthy enough to testify.
The First Gentleman's lawyer was heard before saying that his client will see to it that the libel suits be pursued till the end.
The defense can count on the good lawyer's assurances.
So, no postponements, companero?