The Federal High Court in Abuja has granted an application by the Federal Government to shield a prosecution witness in the ongoing trial of six individuals accused of plotting a coup against President Bola Tinubu. The ruling was delivered yesterday by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, who also oversaw the accelerated trial as the prosecution opened its case by calling four witnesses.
Court Grants Protective Measures
Justice Abdulmalik approved the protective order after the prosecution argued that the witness, a serving officer, faced significant security risks if his identity or testimony were exposed during proceedings. The judge ruled that the terrorism-related nature of one of the charges justified the protective measures, citing Section 232 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), which empowers courts to adopt such measures in security-sensitive cases, particularly those involving terrorism.
Although defense counsel did not oppose the application in principle, they raised concerns about the scope of protection, arguing that full anonymity from the defense team could hinder their ability to test the witness's credibility and ensure a fair trial. They urged the court to balance security considerations against the defendants' constitutional rights. However, Justice Abdulmalik sided with the prosecution, directing that the witness's identity must not appear in any court records or proceedings accessible to the parties or the public. She adjourned briefly to allow a protective screen to be set up before the witness took the stand.
Prosecution Opens Case with Four Witnesses
At the resumed hearing, prosecution counsel Rotimi Oyedepo informed the court that four witnesses were present and that the government was ready to proceed. Three of the witnesses—officials from Jaiz Bank, SunTrust Bank, and Providus Bank—testified and tendered documents obtained from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). These documents were admitted in evidence by the court and subsequently subjected to cross-examination by defense counsel.
When the fourth witness was called, Oyedepo applied for protective conditions, urging the court to shield the officer from public view and conceal his identity to prevent “unnecessary attack.” He anchored his application on Section 232 of the ACJA, which permits non-disclosure of a witness's name, address, and contact details where genuine security concerns exist.
Military Witness Details Coup Plot
One of the witnesses, a soldier from the Nigerian Army Corps of Military Police (NACMP), gave detailed testimony on how the alleged coup plot was uncovered. Led in evidence by the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation (DPPF), Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), the witness confirmed knowing all six defendants, who were arrested in connection with the plot involving Col. Ma'aji, other serving military officers, and civilians.
Oyedepo took the witness through account statements of Purple Wave, identifying how funds were allegedly disbursed for the coup. The witness stated that the alleged plotters drew a plan for the execution of the coup, identified key government officers, and designated individuals to assassinate them. He added that the plotters also identified key targets to be attacked, including Niger Barracks, where senior military officers reside, and planned to take over key roads and streets during the execution.
The witness further testified: “The plotters also shared appointments among themselves, including agencies to be set up and those to be merged after the coup. They did extensive consultation and divination, in which some of the defendants took part, knowing that a coup was ongoing. They received money for these purposes. They also bought vehicles, which were recovered from shops where they were being retrofitted for kinetic purposes.”
During the investigation, the witness said they identified hotels and rooms where meetings were held and recovered receipts for hotel reservations. Oyedepo tendered a letter from BrookVille Hotel and attached documents, including payment receipts. Lawyers for the defendants objected to the admissibility of the documents but stated they would provide reasons at the final address stage. Justice Abdulmalik admitted the documents in evidence and adjourned the case to May 4 and 5, 2026, for the fourth prosecution witness to continue his testimony.
