The Federal High Court in Abuja has granted an application filed by the Federal Government to reopen a terrorism charge filed against five suspects linked to the notorious terrorist kingpin, Bello Turji.

Justice Emeka Nwite granted the application in a ruling on the motion on notice filed by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) seeking an order re-listing the charge, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/633/2024, in the cause list of the court.

Justice Nwite held that the motion, moved by the AGF’s lawyer, David Kaswe, was meritorious and accordingly granted.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the charge was struck out on July 8 by the judge after the defence counsel moved an oral application to that effect for lack of diligent prosecution.

The Federal Government, through the AGF, had preferred an 11-count terrorism charge against eight defendants, including Bello Turji, who is still at large.

In the charge filed on Dec. 16, 2024, by M.B. Abubakar, the Director of the Department of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Musa Muhammed Kamarawa, Abubakar Hashimu, a.k.a. Doctor, Bashir Abdullahi, Samuel Chinedu and Lucky Chukwuma were sued as 1st to 5th defendants.

While Bello Turji, Aminu Muhammad and Sani Lawal, who are all at large, are sued as 6th to 8th defendants, respectively.

The suspects were alleged to have provided material services to terrorist groups led by Turji, Kachalla Halilu, Danbokolo, Lawali, Atarwatse, Buderi and others.

They were accused of procuring and supplying illicit drugs, including Panta injections and cannabis plants (aka Indian hemp); food items; military and police uniforms, camouflage, boots, caps and building materials for the terror groups.

They were also accused of providing bags of cement, cover zinc, bags of nails, M.M. iron rods, etc., to terrorist camps in the forests located in Zamfara, Sokoto and Kaduna States.

The offence is said to be contrary to Section 17 of the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013 and punishable under the same section of the Act.

In count four, Kamarawa and Muhammad (at large) and Lawal (at large), sometime in 2021 in Sokoto State, allegedly aided and abetted the commission of acts of terrorism by acquiring a military gun truck from Libya and supplying the same to a terrorist, Kachalla Halilu, at a cost of approximately N28.5 million (28,500,000).

They were alleged to have paid for the gun truck partly in cash and partly via electronic transfer.

“And which you knew or had reason to believe that this vehicle would be used by Kachalla Halilu, a known terrorist, to commit acts of terrorism.

“You thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18 (a) of the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013 and punishable under the same section of the Act,” the count read in part.

In count five, Kamarawa, Hashimu a.k.a. Doctor, and Abdullahi, sometime in 2018 in Sokoto State, were alleged to have aided and abetted the commission of acts of terrorism by providing material services, including wound care, medication, and shelter, to treat gunshot injuries sustained by Bello Turji after he led his terrorist group to attack Tungar Kolo Village in Zurmi L.G.A. of Zamfara.

The offence is contrary to Section 8 (1) (b) of the Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act 2013 and punishable under the same section of the Act.

Four of the suspects, Musa Kamarawa, Abubakar Hashimu, a.k.a. Doctor, Samuel Chinedu and Lucky Chukwuma, who were arraigned on Dec. 23, 2024, before Justice Nwite, denied their involvement in the act.

The judge, thereafter, ordered their remand in Kuje Correctional Centre and adjourned the matter until Feb. 10 for hearing of pending applications, including motions for the defendants’ bail.

On March 14, the court rejected the defendants’ bail request, granted an order for witness protection, and the prosecution opened its case by calling its 1st prosecution witness (PW-1), simply identified as “ABC” for security reasons.

The PW-1, while giving his testimony in the Hausa language, referred to Musa Kamarawa as his childhood friend.

The witness told the court how another notorious bandit leader, Kachalla Halilu, purchased a gun truck from the Republic of Niger, with the assistance of Kamarawa, to perpetrate terrorist acts in Nigeria.

After the PW-1 gave his evidence, Justice Nwite adjourned the matter until May 23 and May 26 for cross-examination and continuation of trial.

However, on May 23 and May 26, the case could not go on due to the absence of the lead prosecuting counsel, Kaswe, in court.

The lawyer, in a letter of adjournment, was said to have travelled outside the country for an official engagement, and Justice Nwite fixed July 8 for the continuation of the trial.

But on July 8, Kaswe was not in court, and the defence counsel made an oral application, praying the court to strike out the case for want of diligent prosecution, and the judge granted the application.

Meanwhile, when the matter was called, only Kaswe and A.M. Lukman, who appeared for the 1st and 2nd defendants (Kamarawa and Hashimu), were in court.

Kaswe then told the court that the motion on notice sought an order re-listing the charge in the cause list.

The judge asked if all the lawyers for the defendants were duly served, and Kaswe responded in the affirmative.

He argued that, in line with a provision of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, he was entitled to five adjournments before the matter could be struck out.

“And going by the record of this court, the prosecution has not exhausted the time,” he said.

The judge then directed the registrar to find out from the court file if all the defendants were duly served.

It was, however, discovered that two of the defendants’ lawyers had deposed to an affidavit that they were no longer representing them.

Responding, Kaswe submitted that since the lawyers were the last counsel representing the accused and they were served with the motion since Nov. 28, they ought to have appeared in court.

According to him, they cannot, through the bailiff of the court, tell the court that they are no more representing the defendants.

Kaswe described the lawyers’ action as “unethical”, saying it was against the rules of practice.

Justice Nwite, who agreed with Kaswe’s argument, ordered him to move the motion.

Moving the motion on notice, Kaswe said the application, dated Nov. 27, was filed on Nov. 28.

He said the motion was brought pursuant to Sections 6(6) and 36 of the 1999 Constitution and under the inherent power of the court.

He said the crux of the application for re-listing of the case was to give the prosecution the opportunity to have the criminal charge determined on its merits.

The lawyer said the prosecution already had all its witnesses and exhibits to prosecute the case.

He cited previous cases, including the Supreme Court’s decision, to back his argument.

“We have presented cogent reasons to have this matter relisted in the interest of justice, public safety and national security.

“This is a case of terrorism that has an international dimension,” Kaswe said.

He said his absence in court on July 8 was not deliberate.

According to him, the prosecution is diligent and willing to prosecute the case if the charge is re-listed.

He said the court had the power to re-list and restore the charge and order for continuation of hearing.

Kaswe said the defendants would not be prejudiced by the grant of the application.

Lukman, who appeared for the 1st and 2nd defendants, did not oppose Kaswe’s application.

The lawyer, who expressed concern that the defendants were kept in detention for nine months while the trial lasted, reminded that the case was struck out for lack of diligent prosecution.

Hence, Lukman asked for a cost of N10 million against the prosecution.

Delivering the ruling, Justice Nwite held that the Federal Government’s application was meritorious.

“I have listened to the submission of the counsel for the applicant and gone through the affidavit evidence and exhibits, including the written address.

“I am aware that the defendant is not objecting to this application.

“Therefore, I am of the view, and I so hold, that this application is meritorious and accordingly granted.

“There is no order as to cost,” the judge ruled.

The case was consequently adjourned until Jan. 21, 2026, for hearing. (NAN)

Update news