DHQ confused on trial model of suspected coup plotters.
To be court-martialled or arraigned in a regular court.
There are indications that the Federal Government is undecided on the mode of trial for the officers alleged to have plotted a coup against President Bola Tinubu.
That the Federal Government has not given instruction on whether the suspects should be court-martialled or arraigned in a regular court.
According to credible sources, the confusion stems from concerns that the offence was committed under a democratic government, not in a military administration where erring officers could have been arraigned in military courts.
In October 2025, the military arrested 16 senior officers, including one Brigadier General, a Naval officer, and Air Force personnel, but the authority denied that it had something to do with the coup plot.
However, the Defence Headquarters, on January 26, admitted that the officers were indeed arrested for their involvement in a coup plot.
The DHQ Director of Defence Information, Maj. Gen. Samaila Uba, said the suspects would be arraigned before “relevant military judicial panels to face trial in line with the Armed Forces Act” and other applicable service regulations.
Apart from the military officers, about 24 other suspects were arrested in connection with the plan to topple Tinubu’s administration.
However, since the presentation of the report, the military has remained silent on the trial of the suspects.
Undecided judicial process
Some top military officers informed that the silence was due to indecision on how to prosecute the suspects.
The officers, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorised to speak on the matter, confided in newsmen that while the leadership preferred to court-martial the indicted officers, the Presidency was not convinced that a military court was appropriate for the arraignment.
One of the officers at the Defence Headquarters, who is knowledgeable about the investigations said, “We (the military leadership) are waiting for the President’s directive on the constitution of the court-martial panel.
“The DHQ had earlier announced that the indicted officers would be court-martialled in line with our rules. But there are some people, including government officials at the federal level, arguing that a court martial is not appropriate.
“But I think there is a clarification here. Only the military officers will be court-martialled. We have our system. We have our ways of doing things. The civilians will be taken to a regular court; they are not part of us.”
Similarly, a top military officer at the Nigerian Army headquarters told one of our correspondents that investigations had been concluded and that the indicted officers would be arraigned ‘very soon.’
“They will be arraigned very soon. Investigations have been concluded; that was why the DHQ came out to present a report on the coup plot. Whoever is yet to be arrested cannot run forever,” he said.
Asked whether the suspects would be arraigned in a regular court or court-martialled, the officer said, “I don’t know. I am not in a position to determine which court to approach. However, this is not from us (military authority), and I am yet to confirm it. I think some people are pushing for the indicted officers to be arraigned in a civilian court. That is left for the President to decide. He is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.”
A senior official in the Federal Ministry of Justice also said the AG’s office had yet to decide the court in which the suspected coup plotters would be arraigned.
He said there was “confusion” over the arraignment process, explaining that it required a careful approach.
“Nothing has been concluded. The AG’s office is central to the trial, whether it is a court-martial or a regular court.
“There is, indeed, confusion because this is the first time a coup attempt would be made under a civilian government. Previous coups occurred under military regimes, and they had their ways of handling such matters.
“We cannot rush to any court; we need to establish that the court has jurisdiction to handle the matter,” the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, said.
Court-martial decision will be nullified – Falana
Meanwhile, human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, said any decision by a military panel would be nullified if the government proceeded with a court-martial for the suspected coup plotters.
Falana, who spoke with newsmen, said a military panel had no jurisdiction to try the suspects, insisting that they could only be tried at a Federal High Court.
He said, “A court martial has no jurisdiction. If they go ahead with a court martial, the decision will be set aside. It happened in the Second Republic, when Mandara was taken to the Federal High Court, which had no jurisdiction at the time. He was freed by the Supreme Court. If you go to the wrong court, the case will be thrown out.
“We are in a civilian government; you can’t go to a court martial. They are not trying to overthrow a military dictator but a civilian President. Even throughout the military regime, no coup plotter was taken to a court martial because it is not covered by the Armed Forces Act. They were usually taken to special tribunals created by decrees for the trial of coup plotters. Those decrees have been repealed, and we are left with the Constitution.
“The Constitution states that treason and treasonable felony shall be tried in the Federal High Court. You can’t go to any other court. The Constitution is superior to the Armed Forces Act.”
Falana also faulted the continued detention of the suspects, arguing that they should have been arraigned in court.
He added that the military ought to have released other suspects since it had announced that 16 officers were already indicted in the attempted coup.
“They claim that 16 have been indicted. Why are they still detaining about 40 people? If you say you have indicted 16, then you must release the others who are still being detained.
“The military authorities are operating under a constitutional government, not under a military dictatorship. It is wrong to continue detaining the other suspects. Even for those who have been indicted, by now they should be made to face justice. You can’t keep them indefinitely since October last year.
“Under the Constitution, they cannot be detained for more than three months. They should have been arraigned, especially after the investigation report was released, instead of trying them in the media and leaking snippets of the report. That amounts to a media trial, which is not permitted under the Constitution.”
In this article