A Federal High Court in Abuja has accepted three video recordings submitted by the Department of State Services as evidence in the ongoing trial within trial of five men accused of orchestrating the 2011 bombing of the United Nations complex in Abuja. The videos are intended to counter the defendants’ claims that their statements to investigators were obtained through coercion.
Justice Emeka Nwite ruled the clips admissible and scheduled December 5 for the continuation of proceedings. The playback of the videos is expected to help the court determine whether the extra judicial statements made before the DSS were voluntary.
The defendants include Khalid Al Barnawi, believed by security agencies to be a central figure in the August 26, 2011 attack that killed at least twenty people and injured more than seventy. Arrested in 2016, he is being tried with four others identified as Mohammed Bashir Saleh, Umar Mohammed Bello known as Datti, Mohammed Salisu and Yakubu Nuhu known as Bello Maishayi.
The case had dragged for years due to repeated procedural setbacks such as frequent changes in legal representation. The tempo shifted after the appointment of Oluwatosin Ajayi as director general of the DSS, who directed his agency to push for faster resolution of long pending terrorism cases.
The court granted the DSS request for an accelerated hearing, mirroring similar decisions in other trials involving terrorism suspects linked to attacks in Yelwata and Benue.
After completing the viewing of the first defendant’s recording, Justice Nwite set December 5 for the playback of the remaining videos.
Earlier in the day, the same judge admitted extra judicial statements made by three other men on trial for allegedly spying on interests of the United States and Israel on behalf of contacts in Iran. Those defendants, Haruna Ali Abbas, Ibrahim Hussaini Musa and Adam Sulaiman, have been enmeshed in a separate case that began in 2014 and has faced multiple reassignments.
As in the UN bombing trial, the court held a trial within trial to examine whether their statements were made voluntarily. The defendants claimed intimidation and physical mistreatment, while prosecutors argued that the statements were taken properly, read back to the suspects and signed in accordance with the law.
The prosecution witnesses testified that suspects in DSS custody received adequate care, meals, medical attention and family access. The defendants countered with accounts of mistreatment which the court will scrutinise as the larger proceedings continue.
