Follow Us on Google
From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
The Federal High Court, Abuja, yesterday, admitted confessional statements and video recordings of six suspects standing trial over an alleged plot to violently overthrow President Bola Tinubu’s government, dismissing their claims that the statements were obtained through torture, intimidation and other forms of coercion.
The ruling cleared the way for the prosecution to rely on the disputed recordings, some of which contained allegations of plans to cut electricity supply to the Presidential Villa, recruit security personnel and other workers within the complex, and secure access to the seat of power as part of the alleged coup.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, who delivered the ruling following a trial-within-trial conducted to determine the voluntariness of the statements, held that the defendants failed to substantiate their allegations of torture and oppression, noting that the audio-visual recordings did not show evidence that they had been subjected to coercion during interrogation.
The judge said the defendants appeared calm and unruffled in the recordings, while the evidence presented by prosecution witnesses was consistent with the circumstances under which the statements were obtained.
“I discountenance all objections of doubt. Therefore, all the audio visual recordings were voluntarily recorded and I found no involuntariness in the exercise,” she declared.
Justice Abdulmalik also rejected the defence’s contention that the statements were inadmissible because lawyers were not present during the interrogation sessions, holding that the absence of legal representation did not automatically invalidate a confessional statement shown to have been voluntarily made.
Relying on provisions of the Evidence Act, 2011 and a Supreme Court decision, she held that a recorded statement could be admitted where its voluntary character had been established, notwithstanding the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015 concerning the presence of legal practitioners during the recording of confessions.
According to the judge, the Evidence Act takes precedence over the ACJA in determining the admissibility of evidence in a criminal trial.
She similarly dismissed complaints concerning prolonged detention and rejected the sixth defendant’s allegation that no interpreter was present when his statement was recorded in Hausa.
The court held that the recordings tendered through the first four prosecution witnesses, identified as PW-1 to PW-4, were consistent and that the defendants “failed to substantiate the allegations of oppression.”
Consequently, Justice Abdulmalik admitted and marked as exhibits the defendants’ extra-judicial statements, audio-visual recordings, flash drives, an external drive obtained from the Special Investigation Panel and the accompanying certificates of compliance.
The Federal Government, through the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, had arraigned the six defendants on April 22, 2026, on a 13-count charge bordering on treason, terrorism, failure to disclose security intelligence and money laundering linked to terrorism financing.
The charge, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/206/2026, was filed on April 20 by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN.
Those standing trial are retired Maj.-Gen. Mohammed Gana, retired Navy Capt. Erasmus Victor, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Goni and Abdulkadir Sani, listed as the first to sixth defendants, respectively.
Former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva, was also named in connection with the alleged conspiracy and listed as being at large.
The prosecution had called four witnesses when lawyers representing the defendants challenged the admissibility of their statements and the interrogation recordings, insisting that they were obtained involuntarily.
Other News
The objections prompted Justice Abdulmalik to order a trial-within-trial on May 11 to determine whether the disputed evidence satisfied the legal requirements for admissibility.
The prosecution closed its case in the subsidiary proceedings on June 23, while the defendants opened their defence on June 25.
On September 30, the judge reserved her ruling after prosecution counsel Maryam Okorie and the defence lawyers adopted their final written addresses.
Before the commencement of the trial-within-trial, the fourth prosecution witness, an army officer identified only as “AAA” for security reasons, had tendered the interrogation videos, some of which were played in open court on May 20.
One of the recordings featured the fourth defendant, Zekeri Umoru, an employee in the Maintenance Department at the Presidential Villa of Julius Berger Nigeria Plc, who described alleged discussions about disrupting electricity supply to the Villa to facilitate the planned overthrow of the government.
Umoru said he had warned those involved in the discussions that cutting electricity to the Presidential Villa would immediately trigger investigations and could lead to the detention of workers on duty at the time.
According to his recorded statement, Col. Mohammed Ma’aji, identified as the alleged mastermind of the plot, offered him money through the third defendant, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, to recruit between 18 and 19 persons working within the Presidential Villa.
Those allegedly targeted for recruitment included soldiers, Department of State Services (DSS) personnel and Julius Berger employees whose duties gave them access to the complex.
Umoru further alleged that Ma’aji had indicated his determination to gain access to the Villa, even if those approached declined to cooperate.
He quoted the alleged mastermind as saying access could be secured “with force” if necessary.
The statements were made while Umoru was being questioned by members of the Special Investigation Panel that initially handled the case.
In another recording, the sixth defendant, Abdulkadir Sani, a Zaria-based Islamic cleric and Imam, reportedly said he had warned his co-suspects that the alleged plot would fail and that those involved would eventually be exposed.
According to his recorded account, he was informed about the conspiracy and recruited to offer prayers intended to prevent information about the alleged plot and those behind it from becoming public.
The prosecution is relying on the statements and recordings as part of its evidence in support of the charges against the defendants.
However, the court’s decision to admit the recordings does not amount to a determination that the allegations contained in them have been proved or that the defendants are guilty of the offences charged.
Justice Abdulmalik adjourned further hearing until December 7 and 10, 2026, for continuation of the substantive trial.
The fourth prosecution witness, who tendered the interrogation recordings, has yet to be discharged from the witness box.
