The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed January 27, 2027, for judgment in the terrorism financing trial of Tukur Mamu, the alleged negotiator for terrorists involved in the 2022 Abuja-Kaduna train attack. The date was announced after the prosecution and defence adopted their final written addresses, bringing the high-profile case closer to a judicial determination.

The development marks a significant stage in the trial, with the Federal Government maintaining that it has established its case against Mamu, while the defence insists that the prosecution failed to prove the allegations brought against him.

Key Takeaways

• The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled January 27, 2027, for judgment in Tukur Mamu’s terrorism financing trial.
• Defence counsel Johnson Usman (SAN) asked the court to discharge Mamu, arguing that the prosecution failed to establish the charges.
• The prosecution maintained that it had presented sufficient evidence and urged the court to convict the defendant.
• Mamu faces an amended 17-count charge involving alleged terrorism financing, firearms possession and money laundering offences.
• The prosecution called seven witnesses, while Mamu testified as the sole defence witness.

Court Fixes January 27 for Judgment in Mamu’s Trial

Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja fixed January 27, 2027, for judgment on Monday after lawyers representing both parties adopted their final written addresses.

The scheduled judgment follows the conclusion of the evidence presented by both sides, with the defence and prosecution making their final submissions on whether the allegations against Mamu have been established.

During the proceedings, defence counsel Johnson Usman (SAN) urged the court to discharge and acquit his client, maintaining that the Federal Government had failed to prove the charges.

Defence Challenges Prosecution’s Evidence Over Alleged Rifle Licence

In presenting the defence’s final position, Usman questioned the prosecution’s handling of the licence for a rifle allegedly recovered from Mamu’s residence.

The lawyer argued that despite making three requests, the defence had not been provided with the licence, which he said was necessary to establish the circumstances surrounding the alleged firearm possession.

When Justice Umar asked whether he was referring to an expired licence, Usman clarified that the document was still valid at the time of Mamu’s arrest. He maintained that its absence during the proceedings raised reasonable doubt that should be resolved in his client’s favour.

To illustrate his argument, the defence counsel offered an analogy involving a vehicle licence.

My lord, if my vehicle licence expires and my car is parked at home, the VIO cannot arrest me.

The argument formed part of the defence’s position that the prosecution had not sufficiently established the allegations against Mamu.

Prosecution Insists Government Has Established Its Case

Responding to the defence’s submissions, prosecution counsel David Kaswe, who represented the Attorney-General of the Federation, maintained that the rifle and its accompanying licence had already been tendered before the court.

Kaswe told the court that the exhibits were presented through the fifth prosecution witness, an exhibit keeper, and kept in custody with the court’s permission.

He subsequently urged Justice Umar to accept that the Federal Government had proved its case and proceed to convict Mamu on the charges.

The opposing submissions leave the court to determine whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to establish the allegations against the defendant.

Defence Counsel Commends DSS Over Family Visits

Another notable moment during the proceedings came when Usman commended the Department of State Services (DSS) for allowing Mamu’s family to visit him in compliance with a court order.

The defence lawyer expressed appreciation for the agency’s action, describing it as an example of conduct that deserved recognition.

When they do well, we should praise them. My sincere gratitude to the DG DSS.

The commendation was an unusual but notable exchange during the final stage of the proceedings, particularly as the defence continued to challenge aspects of the prosecution’s case.

How Tukur Mamu’s Terrorism Financing Case Began

Mamu was arrested at Cairo International Airport in Egypt on September 7, 2022, before being returned to Nigeria to face trial over allegations connected to the 2022 Abuja-Kaduna train attack.

He was initially arraigned on 10 counts, but the prosecution subsequently amended the charge to 17 counts, introducing additional allegations involving firearms possession and money laundering offences.

Mamu pleaded not guilty when he was re-arraigned on June 1.

As the trial progressed, the Federal Government called seven witnesses before closing its case. Mamu later opened his defence on April 23 and testified as the only witness called on his behalf.

Following the conclusion of the evidence, both parties proceeded to adopt their final written addresses, paving the way for the court to schedule judgment.

The Allegations Behind the Trial

Among the allegations brought against Mamu, the Federal Government accused him of encouraging members of Boko Haram to reject the Chief of Defence Staff’s negotiation committee so that he could position himself as an intermediary in ransom payments.

The prosecution also alleged that Mamu collected $120 million in ransom from relatives of hostages on behalf of the terrorists.

Additionally, the government accused him of exchanging voice messages with the group’s spokesperson, identified as Baba Adamu.

Other allegations in the amended charge relate to the possession of foreign currencies allegedly belonging to terrorists and 47 cartridges without a valid licence.

These allegations remain matters for judicial determination. Mamu pleaded not guilty to the charges, and the court is expected to deliver its judgment after considering the evidence and final arguments presented by both parties.

What Happens Next in Tukur Mamu’s Trial?

With both the prosecution and defence having adopted their final written addresses, the next major development in the case is the court’s scheduled judgment.

Justice Mohammed Umar has fixed January 27, 2027, for the decision in the terrorism financing trial.

The judgment will determine the court’s findings on the charges brought against Mamu by the Federal Government.

Until then, the allegations presented during the proceedings remain subject to the court’s determination.

Conclusion

The Federal High Court’s decision to fix January 27, 2027, for judgment marks an important stage in Tukur Mamu’s terrorism financing trial. After hearing evidence from seven prosecution witnesses and the defendant’s testimony, the court will now consider the competing arguments presented by both parties.

The outcome will provide the next major development in the case, which stems from allegations connected to the 202