Manny Ita –
Two of the six individuals standing trial over an alleged attempt to overthrow Bola Ahmed Tinubu have admitted they were aware of the plot, according to video recordings presented in court.
The footage, played at the Federal High Court in Abuja, showed separate interrogation sessions involving three defendants: retired Navy captain Erasmus Ochegobia Victor, police inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, and retired major-general Mohammed Ibrahim Gana.
In the recordings, Mr Victor and Mr Ibrahim acknowledged they knew about discussions to topple the government but failed to report them. Mr Gana, however, denied any knowledge of such a plan.
Mr Victor said he was aware of conversations led by an alleged mastermind, a serving colonel, who had expressed frustration over stalled promotion. He admitted being asked to assist with funding and logistics, including accommodation for plotters, but claimed he declined involvement. Despite this, he maintained communication with the group through coded messaging and did not alert authorities, citing personal ties.
Mr Ibrahim admitted to deeper involvement. He told investigators he received between ₦1.4 million and ₦1.5 million and carried out reconnaissance around the Presidential Villa, including photographing areas and discussing access routes. He also confirmed that coded terms like “fertiliser” and “farming” were used to disguise funding and operational discussions. He said he acted out of poor judgment and did not believe the plan would succeed.
Mr Gana denied participating in the plot. While acknowledging he knew the alleged mastermind and had forwarded some related messages on WhatsApp, he insisted he had no knowledge of any coup attempt and would have reported it if he did.
The federal government has filed 13 charges against the six defendants, including treason, terrorism, failure to disclose information, and money laundering. Prosecutors say the accused made voluntary statements before a special investigation panel and military police, which were recorded on video.
However, defence lawyers challenged the admissibility of the recordings, arguing the statements were not made voluntarily. The trial judge allowed the videos to be played but ruled that a separate “trial-within-trial” would determine their admissibility.
The case has been adjourned for further proceedings.
