Bias Allegation Rocks Court-Martial Trying 36 Officers Over Coup Plot Against Tinubu

Fresh controversy has erupted at the General Court-Martial trying 36 military personnel over an alleged plot to overthrow the administration of President Bola Tinubu.

The dispute followed allegations that the President of the tribunal suggested that a prima facie case had already been established against the defendants despite the prosecution not yet presenting witnesses or evidence.

The development prompted defence lawyers to question the impartiality of the court-martial and demand that the panel withdraw from the case.

Sources familiar with the proceedings told SaharaReporters that the defence team had initially challenged the jurisdiction of the tribunal, arguing that the allegations amounted to treason and should be handled by the Federal High Court.

However, the court-martial ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear the case.

According to one defence lawyer, concerns arose during the ruling when the tribunal allegedly stated that a prima facie case had been established against the accused.

“At that stage, no witness had testified and no evidence had been led. Yet the court-martial stated in its ruling that a prima facie case had been established against the defendants,” the lawyer said.

The defence team argued that the statement created the impression that the tribunal had already formed an opinion on the substance of the case.

One of the lawyers reportedly requested that the court-martial recuse itself from further proceedings.

Sources said the issue generated extensive arguments in court.

According to sources, the Judge Advocate later acknowledged that the statement was made in error and apologised.

The Judge Advocate reportedly suggested that the reference to a prima facie case be removed from the ruling.

However, defence lawyers opposed the proposal, insisting that the statement had already been made in open court and should remain part of the record.

After further deliberations, the suggestion to alter the ruling was reportedly abandoned.

The defence subsequently applied for certified copies of the proceedings, particularly the ruling that contained the disputed statement.

Lawyers said they wanted to verify how the ruling was reflected in the official records.

According to them, the requested records had yet to be made available.

In the ruling delivered by the President of the General Court-Martial, Air Vice Marshal H.I. Alhaji, the tribunal held that the Defence Headquarters Garrison Commander possessed the legal authority to convene the court-martial under the Armed Forces Act.

The court also rejected arguments that the matter should be treated as treason and exclusively handled by the Federal High Court.

According to the tribunal, the accused are being prosecuted under provisions of the Armed Forces Act relating to mutiny and failure to suppress mutiny.

“The accused are standing trial on offences relating to mutiny and failure to suppress mutiny,” the court ruled.

The defendants include senior military officers, junior officers and other personnel drawn from the Nigerian Army, Navy and Air Force.

They are facing multiple counts bordering on conspiracy, mutiny, failure to suppress mutiny and related offences allegedly committed between January 2022 and November 2025.