Court Begins Trial-Within-Trial In Alleged Coup Plot Case Against Six Defendants

The Federal High Court in Abuja has commenced a trial-within-trial in the ongoing case involving six persons accused of plotting to overthrow the government of President Bola Tinubu.

The separate hearing is aimed at determining whether statements allegedly made by the defendants to military investigators were obtained voluntarily or through coercion, torture, intimidation, or inducement as claimed by the defence.

During proceedings, trial judge Joyce Abdulmalik cautioned both parties to focus strictly on issues relating to the voluntariness of the statements and avoid discussing matters already before the court in the main trial.

The prosecution, led by Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, informed the court that it would call three witnesses during the hearing.

The first witness, an officer from the Nigerian Army Corps of Military Police, told the court that the defendants were calm and fully aware of their constitutional rights before making their statements. He insisted that investigators complied with the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, during the process.

The prosecution tendered written statements allegedly obtained from the six defendants, alongside electronic devices said to contain video recordings of the interrogation sessions. The court admitted the exhibits without objection from defence lawyers during the trial-within-trial proceedings.

According to the witness, all suspects were informed of their rights, including the right to remain silent and engage legal representation. He denied allegations that any of the defendants were tortured or forced into making statements.

The witness specifically described the first defendant, a retired army general, as calm and cooperative throughout the investigation process. He also claimed that the video recordings showed no signs of intimidation or coercion.

While testifying about the sixth defendant, the witness said an interpreter was provided because the suspect could not communicate fluently in English. According to him, the statements were translated between Hausa and English before being read back for confirmation.

Under cross-examination, the witness admitted that no lawyers, civil society representatives, or Justices of the Peace were present when the statements were recorded. He also acknowledged that some written statements and video recordings were taken on different dates.

Defence lawyers questioned inconsistencies relating to recording dates, absence of legal representation during interrogation, and lack of footage showing defendants physically writing their statements. However, the witness maintained that the investigation followed constitutional safeguards and military procedures.

The court subsequently adjourned the matter until May 13, 2026, for continuation of the trial-within-trial proceedings.