The Federal High Court in Abuja has admitted as evidence the statements and video recordings made by six alleged coup plotters during military interrogation, after dismissing defence claims that the materials were extracted through torture, inducement and coercion.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik delivered the ruling on Thursday at the close of a trial-within-trial conducted to test the voluntariness of the evidence. She held that the Federal Government had established that the defendants made their statements and took part in the recorded interrogations of their own volition.
The judge characterised the allegations of duress as an afterthought, noting that no evidence was presented to support claims that the military subjected the defendants to torture or applied force to obtain the statements.
Who are the defendants?
The six defendants are retired Major General Mohammed Gana, retired Navy Captain Erasmus Victor, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Goni and Abdulkadir Sani.
The Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation arraigned them on April 22 on a 13-count charge bordering on treason, terrorism, failure to disclose security intelligence and money laundering linked to terrorism financing.
Why the court ordered a trial-within-trial
Justice Abdulmalik ordered the trial-within-trial on May 11 after defence lawyers challenged the admissibility of the statements and video recordings tendered by the prosecution, insisting they had not been voluntarily obtained.
The objection arose after four prosecution witnesses testified, including an Army officer identified by the codename AAA, who tendered video recordings of the defendants’ interrogations.
Trial to resume in December
With the objections dismissed and the materials admitted as exhibits, the judge adjourned the case until December 7 and 10 for continuation of the trial.
The ruling means the prosecution can now rely on the defendants’ statements and the interrogation footage as it builds its case on the charges, while the defence has lost its bid to have the evidence excluded on voluntariness grounds.
