The Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday directed the Department of State Services (DSS) to investigate allegations that evidence tendered in the ongoing trial of six men accused of plotting to overthrow the President Bola Tinubu-led government was leaked and circulated on social media.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik gave the directive following concerns raised by the prosecution that materials presented in court and served on defence lawyers had allegedly found their way to social media platforms, despite an existing order protecting witnesses and restricting the dissemination of sensitive trial materials.
The judge ordered the DSS to identify the source of the alleged leak and prosecute anyone found responsible for violating the court’s directives, while emphasising that the investigation should proceed alongside the ongoing trial.
The order followed submissions by counsel to the prosecution, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), who informed the court that videos admitted in evidence during the proceedings had allegedly been posted online by a social media personality known as “Very Dark Man.”
Oyedepo told the court that the individual was present in the courtroom and urged the judge to direct an investigation into how the materials became publicly available.
Responding to the allegation, lawyers representing the six defendants denied any involvement in the purported leak.
Some of the defence counsel argued that the prosecution should file a formal application supported by an affidavit before any conclusions could be drawn, while others maintained that neither they nor their clients had anything to do with the publication of the materials.
Following the exchanges, Justice Abdulmalik ruled that the DSS should investigate the matter independently and determine whether there had been any breach of the court’s witness protection order.
The court subsequently proceeded to hear applications for bail filed by the defendants.
While the defence team urged the court to grant their clients bail on liberal terms, the prosecution opposed the applications and requested that they be refused.
The judge adjourned the matter until June 25 and June 30, 2026, for the first, second and third defendants to open their defence in the ongoing trial-within-trial.
She further fixed July 1 and July 2 for the fourth, fifth and sixth defendants to present their defence and scheduled July 20 for ruling on the bail applications.
Earlier during proceedings, the prosecution sought to tender statements allegedly made by the defendants during interrogation by security operatives.
The request was made through the fourth prosecution witness, identified in court only as “DDD,” who testified during the trial-within-trial instituted to determine whether the statements were made voluntarily.
Led in evidence by Oyedepo, the witness denied allegations by the defendants that they were tortured, intimidated or compelled to make the statements.
According to him, none of the defendants was subjected to physical abuse or coercion during interrogation.
Addressing claims that the defendants had been restrained with chains during questioning, the witness dismissed the allegation.
“It is not true. The feet of the defendants were not chained. They walked into the interview room by themselves,” he told the court.
He further argued that if the defendants had indeed been chained, the sound of the restraints would have been audible in the video recordings of the interrogation sessions that were earlier played in court.
On the issue of legal representation during the interrogation process, the witness stated that none of the defendants requested the presence of lawyers, family members, officials of the Legal Aid Council or a Justice of the Peace before making their statements.
He maintained that the statements and accompanying audiovisual recordings were obtained voluntarily and should be admitted as evidence in the substantive trial.
Under cross-examination by defence counsel, the witness acknowledged that none of the defendants had legal representation or independent observers present during the recording of the statements.
However, he insisted that the statements were made freely and without any form of pressure or inducement.
At the conclusion of the witness’s testimony, the prosecution announced the closure of its case in the trial-within-trial after calling four witnesses.
The six defendants are standing trial over their alleged involvement in a purported coup plot aimed at toppling the administration of President Bola Tinubu.
