BEVERLY HILLS, April 11, (THEWILL) – Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday okayed Federal Government’s request seeking protection of its witnesses in the on-going trial of the seven suspected Boko Haram kingpins, who were allegedly involved in the kidnap and murder of 11 foreign nationals between 2011 and 2013 in the North.
The name of the suspects are: Mohammed Usman (aka Khalid Albarnawi), described as the leader of a Boko Haram splinter group, Jama’atu Ansarul Muslimina Fi Biladis Sudan (a.k.a ANSARU); Mohammed Bashir Saleh, Umar Bello (aka Abu Azzan); Mohammed Salisu (Datti); Yakubu Nuhu (aka Bello Maishayi), Usman Abubakar (Mugiratu) and a lady, Halima Aliyu.
The court took the decision for the prosecution witnesses to be shielded following an application by the prosecution counsel, Shuaibu Labaran, that the prosecution witnesses should be protected and for them to be addressed with pseudo names in the course of the trial.
Labaran also sought leave of the court for the public to be barred from covering the trial on the grounds that the suspects are on trial for allegedly belonging to a proscribed group.
He also prayed the court to forbid the proceedings to be reported and make the report inaccessible to the public.
Objecting to the application, counsel to the defendants, Samuel Attah, told the court that part of the grounds for the prosecution’s application are offensive to the provision of the Evidence Act, adding that some of the paragraphs were incompetent and thus should be struck out.
According to him, an operative of the Department of State Services, DSS, who deposed to the affidavit in support of the prosecution’s motion said he got information from Labaran, an external fact. He submitted this was not acceptable as the person who swore to the affidavit did not carry out the investigation.
Another defence counsel, Elijah Oloruntoba, in his submission, argued that some of the grounds of the application are incompetent, especially ground one, which is against the Evidence Act. In his own submission, K. Abdulkarim, representing the 6th defendant, was not opposed to trying the defendants in secret, but was against some of the grounds and begged the court to expunge the paragraph in the affidavit that offends provisions of the Evidence Act.
However, Labaran told the court that since the defendants’ counsel did not object to all the paragraphs of the application, there were still grounds for the application to succeed and urged the court to grant the applicant.
In his ruling, Justice Tsoho directed that prosecution witnesses should be protected by being allowed to give evidence behind a screen to be provided by the court.
The judge also directed that the identity of the prosecution witnesses would also be shielded from members of the public by addressing witnesses in pseudonyms in the course of the trial.
About the Author
