The ruling follows months of legal arguments over whether the prosecution could rely on statements and recordings obtained during military investigations. The case remains at the evidence stage, and the defendants have not been convicted of the offences alleged against them.

The Federal High Court in Abuja has admitted statements and video recordings of six alleged coup plotters as evidence in their trial over an alleged plan to overthrow President Bola Tinubu’s government, after Justice Joyce Abdulmalik rejected claims that the materials were obtained through torture, inducement or coercion on Thursday, November 5, 2026.

Also read:Lagos police defend officers driving against traffic

The ruling represents a significant development in the prosecution, with the disputed interrogation materials now available for consideration as the substantive trial continues.

Justice Abdulmalik delivered the decision after a trial-within-trial conducted to determine whether the defendants had voluntarily made the statements and participated in the recorded interrogations.

The judge held that the Federal Government had established the voluntariness of the materials and found no evidence to support the allegations of mistreatment.

She described the defendants’ claims of duress as an afterthought and dismissed their objections, allowing the statements and recordings to be admitted as exhibits.

The six defendants are retired Major General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana, retired Navy Captain Erasmus Ochegobia Victor, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Goni and Abdulkadir Sani.

The Federal Government, through the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, arraigned the defendants on April 22, 2026, on a 13-count charge involving alleged 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.

The prosecution alleges that the defendants conspired to levy war against the state and undermine the government. The defendants have denied the charges.

The case also involves allegations concerning former Bayelsa State Governor Timipre Sylva, who was listed in the charge as being at large.

The admissibility dispute began after the prosecution sought to tender the defendants’ extra-judicial statements and video recordings of their interrogations.

Defence lawyers challenged the materials, arguing that their clients had not made the statements voluntarily and alleging that the military used coercion, torture and inducement.

Justice Abdulmalik ordered the trial-within-trial on May 11 to examine those objections before deciding whether the evidence could be used in the main case.

During earlier proceedings, the court heard testimony from prosecution witnesses, including an Army officer identified by the codename AAA, who tendered video recordings of the interrogations.

The recordings were also played in court in May, when defence counsel continued to contest their admissibility.

The trial-within-trial was limited to determining whether the statements and recordings were voluntarily obtained. It was not a determination of whether the defendants were guilty of the substantive charges.

The prosecution’s case has attracted significant public attention because of the seriousness of the allegations and the involvement of retired military officers, a serving police inspector and civilians.

The defendants were initially remanded in custody following their arraignment, after they pleaded not guilty to the charges. The court had also directed that the case proceed on an accelerated basis.

Following Thursday’s ruling, Justice Abdulmalik adjourned the substantive trial until December 7 and 10, 2026, for continuation of proceedings.

The admission of the statements and video recordings clears one evidentiary hurdle for the prosecution, but the Federal Government must still prove its allegations beyond reasonable doubt.