The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday granted an application by the federal government to shield the identity of a witness in the ongoing trial of six alleged coup plotters.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik granted the request after hearing arguments from the prosecution counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, and defence lawyers in the case marked FHC/ABJ/CR/206/2026.
The defendants include retired Maj.-Gen. Mohammed Ibrahim Gana, retired Capt. (NN) Erasmus Ochegobia Victor, Insp. Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni and Abdulkadir Sani.
They were arraigned on April 22 on a 13-count charge bordering on treason, terrorism, failure to disclose security intelligence and alleged money laundering linked to terrorism financing.
Although former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva, is not standing trial, he was listed in the charge as being at large.
At Wednesday’s proceedings, the prosecution informed the court that it was ready to open its case with four witnesses present.
Three witnesses from Jaiz Bank, SunTrust Bank and Providus Bank testified, tendering documents obtained from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) through the prosecution.
The documents were admitted in evidence and marked as exhibits after no objection from the defence.
The witnesses were also cross-examined by defence lawyers.
However, when the fourth witness was called, the prosecution counsel applied for protective measures, urging the court to shield the witness’s identity on security grounds.
Oyedepo argued that the application was necessary to prevent “unnecessary attack” on the witness, who he said is a serving security officer.
He relied on Section 232 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, which allows courts to adopt protective measures in appropriate cases, particularly in terrorism-related matters.
While the defence lawyers did not oppose the application, they argued that shielding the witness from public view should not extend to total anonymity from the defence.
They insisted that fair trial rights required that the identity be known to them for proper testing of credibility.
“The defence must be allowed to know the identity of the witness, even if the public is shielded. Section 232 does not remove that right,” one of the defence lawyers argued, urging the court to balance security concerns with fair hearing guarantees.
In response, Oyedepo maintained that full protection was necessary, insisting that disclosure would expose the witness to security risks.
He added that the law permits the use of initials or other non-identifying measures in such circumstances.
Ruling on the application, Justice Abdulmalik held that the request was justified in view of the nature of the charges, particularly those relating to terrorism.
“The law permits protective measures, including non-disclosure of names, addresses and contact details where the court is satisfied that security concerns exist,” the judge said, citing Section 232(2) of the ACJA.
She therefore granted the application and ordered that the witness’s identity be shielded.
The court further directed that the name must not appear in court records or proceedings accessible to the parties or the public.