Plateau court upholds jurisdiction over Easter attack suspects

n n

A Plateau State High Court sitting in Jos has ruled that state high courts have jurisdiction to try persons accused of terrorism and terrorism-related offences under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

n

Justice Gedeliah Fwomyon gave the ruling on Tuesday while determining a preliminary objection to the jurisdiction of the court filed by four suspects arrested by the Department of State Services over their alleged involvement in the Easter 2026 attack on the Angwa Rukuba community, which left more than 30 people dead.

n

The Plateau State Government had filed charges against five suspects over the killings.

n

The suspects were arrested by the DSS between April 3 and April 10, 2026, and charged with offences including criminal conspiracy and terrorism, among other related offences.

n

The accused persons- Isa Umar Ibrahim, Auwalu Abubakar, also known as Auwalu Dogo, Musa Abubakar Ibrahim, also known as Yaroro and another suspect- were alleged to have conspired to carry out the attack.

n

According to the charge filed by the state Attorney General, Philemon Daffi, the defendants acted “contrary to Section 269 and punishable under Section 270 of the Penal Code Law of Plateau State, 2017.”

n

At the resumed hearing of the case in Jos on Tuesday, counsel for the defendants challenged the jurisdiction of the state high court to entertain the matter, arguing that terrorism offences under the TPPA were within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

n

However, in his ruling, Justice Fwomyon held that although the TPPA 2022 was federal legislation, the law did not expressly prohibit a state high court from trying offences created under it.

n

The judge also held that there was nothing in the constitution preventing a state House of Assembly from legislating on terrorism, noting that terrorism was not included in the Exclusive Legislative List.

n

Justice Fwomyon further held that the Plateau State Penal Code was not inconsistent with the provisions of the TPPA.

n

He added that both the National Assembly and state Houses of Assembly could validly legislate on matters relating to terrorism within their respective legislative competence.

n

The court consequently dismissed the defendants’ objection challenging its jurisdiction to entertain the terrorism charges.

n

Meanwhile, the court also rejected a motion filed by the third defendant, Auwalu Abubakar, seeking an order directing the DSS to transfer him to the Jos University Teaching Hospital for medical treatment.

n

The defendant had sought the order because he required medical attention.

n

However, the judge noted that following their arrest by the DSS, the suspects were subjected to medical examinations and certified medically fit for detention.

n

Justice Fwomyon further held that the court could not grant the relief sought based on documents that had not been placed before it.

n

According to the judge, the defendant failed to furnish the court with a medical report or other documentary evidence to support his application for transfer to JUTH.

n

He consequently dismissed the application.

n

“Motion of the defendant is hereby refused and dismissed for failure to establish sufficient factual foundation upon which the relief is sought,” the judge ruled.

n

The court adjourned further proceedings in the matter until October 15 and 21, 2026.

n

n n