Alleged Coup: Court-martial Warns Lawyers Against ‘Weaponising’ Protest

The President of the General Court-Martial trying 36 Nigerian military personnel over an alleged plot to overthrow President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s government has cautioned defence lawyers against “weaponising” the right to protest.

The President of the court-martial, Air Vice Marshal H. I. Alhaji, reportedly gave the warning during proceedings while addressing interactions between members of the defence team and the court.

Sources present at the proceedings told SaharaReporters that Alhaji urged lawyers and other parties to exercise restraint and adopt a diplomatic approach in their engagements with the tribunal.

“And I urge you not to weaponize the right to protest. Please. I cannot imagine seeing a Senior Advocate of Nigeria protesting,” Alhaji was quoted as saying.

“I am sure we all have a very hard experience. So I cannot imagine a general officer protesting. It is not exciting.”

Alhaji also stressed the need for civility in exchanges during the proceedings, noting that heated interactions could affect those involved.

“We should also be a little bit diplomatic in the way we talk. Okay?” he said.

“So we should also find a nice way of talking. We are all human beings. Sometimes our feelings get hurt.

“We should find this middle ground. The way we talk to each other.”

The comments came amid increased attention on the court-martial proceedings involving the 36 military personnel accused of participating in an alleged plot against the Tinubu administration.

The allegations against the personnel remain subject to determination by the military tribunal.

During the proceedings, a lawyer representing the accused personnel also appealed to the court-martial to reconsider restrictions preventing them from having access to their families.

The defence counsel acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations but argued that prolonged separation from relatives was adding to the psychological pressure on the accused.

“I also appeal to this honourable court to re-address the issue of the family of the accused persons,” the lawyer said.

“Yes, I know they are facing serious charges. And also, being denied access to members of their family constitutes another psychological turmoil on them.”

The lawyer argued that although the government had been providing for the detained personnel, contact with their relatives could offer additional emotional support during the proceedings.

“If the court would reconsider granting the family access, at least they are not with their family,” the counsel said.

The defence further argued that seeing their relatives in good health and receiving their support could improve the morale of the accused personnel as they continued to face trial.

The lawyer consequently appealed directly to the tribunal to permit family visits.

“So I appeal also to the honourable court to consider the issue of granting the family members access to see their beloved ones,” he said.

“That is the appeal I want to make to the honourable court.”