Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered an accelerated hearing in the trial of five men accused of masterminding the August 26, 2011, bombing of the United Nations building in Abuja.
The ruling came after prosecution counsel Alex Izinyon (SAN) applied for expedited proceedings, noting that the case has lingered for nearly 15 years.
Izinyon urged the court to allow daily hearings where possible, in line with the court’s practice direction on terrorism-related cases, arguing it was in the interest of justice, the prosecution, defence, and society.
Defence counsel did not oppose the application, and Justice Nwite granted it.
The defendants — Al-Barnawi (also known as Kafuri, Naziru, Alhaji Yahaya, Mallam Dauda, Alhaji Tanimu), Mohammed Bashir Saleh, Umar Mohammed Bello (aka Datti; Mohammed Salisu), and Yakubu Nuhu (aka Bello Maishayi) — are being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS).
At the resumed hearing, a prosecution witness — a senior DSS operative and computer forensic expert (PW3) — testified in the ongoing trial-within-trial to determine whether the defendants’ statements were voluntary.
While being cross-examined by Bala Dakum (counsel to the second defendant), the witness asserted that the DSS conducts investigations professionally and that portable evidential forensic recorders comply with the Evidence Act and global standards.
He could not recall the exact month and year Exhibit C (a video of an interview with the second defendant) was recorded but maintained that all official interactions were fully recorded.
Responding to claims of skips in the recording, he said the device is tamper-proof: any pause triggers automatic closure and digital signing, preventing additions or edits. It records simultaneously on two exact DVDs in real time.
On why only the defendant’s face appeared in the video, he explained that standard operating procedure protects interviewers’ identities for personal security reasons.
He denied that recordings are edited or discarded if an interviewer’s face is inadvertently captured, stating all sessions are submitted to the court, with security concerns left for judicial determination.
Cross-examined by F. K. Kamaga (counsel to the first defendant), the witness detailed how audio-visual recordings, statements, and translations were handled for all five defendants.
He rejected suggestions that the device could be paused or edited mid-session.
The case was adjourned to March 4, 2026, for continuation of the trial-within-trial and further proceedings.
