A court gavel.
The Nigerian Armed Forces has inaugurated a general court-martial to try 36 military personnel accused of involvement in an alleged plot to overthrow the administration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The court-martial, constituted by the Defence Headquarters, was inaugurated on Friday at the Scorpion Mess in Asokoro under heavy security presence.
Despite the significance of the case, proceedings were held behind closed doors, with journalists and members of the public denied access to the venue.
Tight Security Around Proceedings
The trial opened amid heightened security measures, reflecting the sensitive nature of allegations involving an attempted unconstitutional takeover of government.
Accredited defence correspondents who reportedly received prior invitations were denied entry on arrival.
Security operatives also prohibited the use of mobile phones and prevented documentation of movements around the venue.
The 36 accused personnel were brought to the location in an Army Headquarters Garrison bus at about 8:53 a.m., according to reports.
The identities and ranks of all defendants were not immediately disclosed publicly.
Parallel Criminal Trial in Federal High Court
The military proceedings are taking place alongside separate criminal charges filed by the Federal Government before the Federal High Court of Nigeria in Abuja.
On April 22, Lateef Fagbemi arraigned another group of suspects linked to the same alleged conspiracy before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik.
Those defendants reportedly include:
- Retired military officers
- A police inspector
- Civilian suspects
They pleaded not guilty to a 13-count charge involving allegations of:
- Treason
- Terrorism
- Money laundering
- Failure to report an alleged coup plot
The court ordered their remand in the custody of the Department of State Services, widely known as the DSS.
An accelerated hearing in the civilian case has been scheduled for April 27.
Alleged Plot in 2025
According to prosecutors, the suspects conspired in 2025 to overthrow the elected government.
Authorities also allege that some individuals with knowledge of the plan failed to report it to relevant institutions.
While government officials have not publicly released detailed evidence, the case is one of the most serious national security matters to emerge during the current administration.
The military earlier stated that the alleged coup attempt was uncovered through internal intelligence operations, which led to arrests and subsequent investigations.
Legal Debate Over Dual Prosecution
The decision to pursue separate proceedings through both a court-martial and the Federal High Court has triggered debate among lawyers and civil rights advocates.
Senior human rights lawyer Femi Falana, SAN, has called on the Attorney-General to discontinue the military trial and consolidate all related charges before the civilian court.
Falana cited Section 174 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, which grants the Attorney-General powers to institute or discontinue criminal proceedings in the public interest.
He also referenced Section 251 of the Constitution, arguing that offences such as treason and terrorism fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.
According to him, prosecuting some suspects before a civilian judge while trying others before a military tribunal raises questions of legal consistency and due process.
He further argued that courts-martial may not have jurisdiction over grave constitutional offences such as treason.
Historical Context
Nigeria has a long history of military coups and attempted coups, particularly during the decades when the armed forces dominated politics.
During previous eras of military rule, coup allegations were often handled by special tribunals rather than conventional courts-martial.
Since Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999, civilian constitutional institutions have remained central to governance, making any allegation of coup plotting especially sensitive.
Analysts say the current proceedings will be closely watched as a test of how democratic institutions respond to national security threats while respecting the rule of law.
Calls for Transparency
Families of the accused personnel have reportedly joined calls for an open and transparent process.
Omoyele Sowore and other activists have also urged authorities to ensure the defendants receive fair hearings and full protection of their constitutional rights.
Concerns raised include:
- Access to legal counsel
- Public transparency of proceedings
- Presumption of innocence
- Equal treatment of all accused persons
- Protection from unlawful detention
Observers note that closed military proceedings can create perceptions of secrecy, especially in politically sensitive cases.
Military Discipline vs Civilian Justice
The case highlights a broader issue in democratic systems: the balance between military discipline and civilian legal oversight.
Courts-martial are typically empowered to handle breaches of military law, misconduct, insubordination, desertion, and discipline-related offences involving service members.
However, when allegations involve crimes such as treason or terrorism against the state, legal experts often debate whether civilian courts should take exclusive jurisdiction.
The outcome of this dispute may shape future treatment of similar cases involving serving personnel accused of constitutional offences.
What Happens Next
The military court-martial is expected to continue preliminary proceedings, while the Federal High Court prepares for the accelerated hearing later this month.
Possible outcomes include:
- Continued dual-track trials
- Consolidation into one civilian process
- Jurisdictional challenges by defence lawyers
- Appeals on constitutional grounds
For now, both proceedings remain active.
National Significance
Any allegation of a coup plot carries enormous political and security implications in Nigeria, Africa’s most populous democracy.
The Tinubu administration is likely to frame the prosecutions as evidence of vigilance against threats to constitutional order.
Critics, however, will continue to insist that even national security cases must meet the highest standards of fairness, legality, and transparency.
As the trials progress, Nigerians will be watching not only the allegations themselves, but also whether justice is administered in a manner consistent with democratic principles and the rule of law.
