Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected objections raised by the alleged coup plotters against the admission of statements and video recordings they made during their interrogation by the military over an alleged plot to violently overthrow President Bola Tinubu’s government.
Delivering her ruling on Thursday, the judge upheld the Federal Government’s argument that the defendants voluntarily made the statements and video recordings while being questioned by military investigators.
In her decision following a trial-within-trial conducted to determine the validity of the defendants’ claims, Justice Abdulmalik held that there was no evidence to suggest that the statements or video recordings were obtained through coercion.
The judge described the defendants’ claims that they were forced to make the statements as an afterthought, dismissing them as unbelievable in all respects.
Specifically, the judge dismissed the allegations of torture, inducement and employment of force by the military to make them make the confessional statements and video recordings.
She admitted the statements and video recordings as exhibits against the defendants while dismissing their claims of being made under duress.
The alleged coup plotters are retired Major General Mohammed Gana, retired Navy Capt. Erasmus Victor, Insp. Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Goni and Abdulkadir Sani as 1st to 6th defendants respectively.
The Federal Government, through the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, had, on April 22, arraigned the six defendants on a 13-count charge.
The charge, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/206/2026, was filed on April 20 by the Director, Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN.
The defendants were accused of offences ranging from treason and terrorism to failure to disclose security intelligence and money laundering linked to terrorism financing.
Justice Abdulmalik had, on May 11, ordered the trial-within-trial after defence lawyers objected to the admissibility of the statements and video recordings the prosecution sought to tender.
They argued that the statements were not made voluntarily and filed an objection after the prosecution had called four witnesses.
The 4th prosecution witness, PW-4, an army officer identified by the codename “AAA,” had tendered video recordings of the defendants’ interrogations before the trial-within-trial began.
Justice Abdulmalik admitted the statements of the accused persons and the video recordings against the defendants.
She subsequently fixed December 7 and 10 for continuation of the trial.
