The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, admitted an AK-47 rifle recovered from one of the defendants in the ongoing trial of the nine suspected terrorists linked to the June 2025 attack on Yelwata in Benue, as evidence.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik admitted the rifle in evidence and marked it as exhibit after the 1st prosecution witness (PW-1), Moses Paul, tendered it through the Federal Government’s lawyer, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN.

While being led in evidence by Oyedepo who is the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, the witness said the firearm was recovered from “Ardo Muhammadu Saidu,” one of the defendants.

According to the PW-1, the rifle has some naira notes in‑between because it is their belief that if you put money in an AK-47, it will answer.

The judge then admitted the rifle as “Exhibit A,” and the accompanying naira notes were admitted as “Exhibits C1 to C5,” respectively.

The lawyer also tendered a ballistic report, which the witness, a senior officer from the Nigeria Police Force’s Intelligence Response Unit, said showed that the rifle was “recently used and active.”

The judge admitted the report as “Exhibit B.”

The Nigerian government had, on Feb. 2, arraigned the nine defendants linked to the June 13, 2025 attack on Yelwata village in Guma Local Government Area of Benue.

During the attack, no fewer than 150 people died, while scores sustained different injuries.

The defendants were arraigned on 57-count charge bordering on terrorism offences.

The suspects include Ardo Lawal Mohammed Dono, Ardo Muhammadu Saidu, and Alhaji Haruna Abdullahi.

The rest are Yakubu Adamu, Musa Mohammed, Abubakar Adamu, Shaibu Ibrahim, Sale Mohammed, and Bako Jibrin.

They, however, denied all the charges preferred against them.

The witness, on Feb. 26, narrated the circumstances of the Yelwata attack, stating that the assailants, armed with rifles, stormed the community following prior meetings in Nasarawa State.

When the case was called on Monday, the PW-1 said investigation revealed that “the whole problem started with an anti-grazing law instituted by the Benue State government.

“One of the first people that was affected was Alhaji Haruna Abdullahi, the 3rd defendant, who said his children and cattle were killed.

“He put a call to the police and reported that this is what happened to him.

“The police asked him to come so that they would see how the problem could be sorted out. But he refused and told the police that he would organise men for a revenge mission.”

The witness said Muhammed Sayidi, the 2nd defendant, was also affected by the anti-grazing law.

“Muhammed said over 150 cows and two of his children were killed close to Yelwata and later bought an AK‑47 for one million naira from one Musa, ” paul said.

The witness said “this and many more attacks resulted from our investigation being the reason both Haruna and Sayidi and other Ardo met the 1st defendant who is the chief of Fulanis in Nassarawa State.”

He said their investigation revealed that the 1st defendant, Ardo Lawal Mohammed Dono, “organised the meeting which was for all the Ardos in Nassarawa and Benue present at the meeting.

“He also asked all the Ardos to go home and organise themselves for the attack and that all must contribute financially or otherwise and that anybody that did not contribute will be dealt with.”

Following Mr. Lawal’s instructions, the witness further alleged that Saidu, being the Ardo of Kadanko, held a second meeting in his own palace where they decided how each person would contribute money and resources.

During the process of that meeting, there was even an argument on where they would attack.

“And there, they agreed to attack Yelwata, Daudu, and Udeyi, but they concluded on Yelwata”

He said their investigation further revealed that Haruna Abdullahi contributed “the sum of 300,000 while Musa Muhammed contributed 200,000 for that attack.”

According to the witness, Haruna Abdullahi led the attack while Ardo Muhammadu Saidu revealed to us that he went for the attack with five of his children still at large, all with AK‑47s.

“And he confessed that during the course of the attack, he personally killed eight people.

“He also mentioned all the other people he recognised as being present during the attack,” the witness added.

When asked if he was able to get any of the AK‑47s, the witness said he recovered one from Saidu.

The witness, however, said the other riffles are with his children, and that one of his children was killed in the battle with the military while the other AK‑47s are still with the children, who are currently at large.

Paul, who produced the gun in court, said, “The rifle has some naira notes in-between because it is their belief that if you put money in an AK‑47, it will answer.”

After the prosecution sought to tender the gun as evidence, two of the defence lawyers reserved their objections, while others said they were not objecting.

The judge therefore admitted the AK‑47 and naira notes in evidence

Continuing, the witness said the AK‑47 was later retrieved and taken for ballistic analysis, and a report on its usability was obtained from the ballistician.

Ibrahim Angulu, lawyer to the 1st defendant, objected to tendering it as evidence, stating that the report was not from the witness and required certification as a public document.

The lawyer to the 2nd defendant relied on the 1st defendant’s objection, while other defence lawyers reserved their objections.

Responding, Oyedepo said, “The document is in original form and does not require any other certificate. It was submitted to the office of PW-1 and the stamp shows it was a document received in the course of investigation.”

After hearing the lawyers submissions, the judge also admitted the ballistic report as evidence.

The witness also testified that Alhaji Musa Muhammed, brother to the 3rd defendant, was part of the meeting to plan the attack and contributed.

“Shuaibu Ibrahim, the 8th defendant, was part of the meeting and refused to give information to the police despite stern warning.

“If the 7th and 8th defendants had given that information to the police, the police would have actively investigated, apprehended, and prosecuted offenders, and could have prevented the attack,” the witness said.

He also said that Sale Muhammed was equally present at the meeting at Ardo’s places.

After the witness concluded his testimony, the prosecution tendered the defendants’ statements, including those taken in June last year and that of the 2nd defendant taken in November last year, except for the statement of the 8th defendant.

Angulu, lawyer to the 1st defendant, objected to the statement, saying it was obtained under extreme duress and in the absence of his client’s lawyer.

The lawyer to the 2nd defendant and other defence lawyers supported the objections.

The judge, therefore, ordered a trial-within-trial to commence March 13 by 10 a.m.

Earlier in the case, the lawyers to the defendants, Angulu, A. I. Kaura, Ahmed Muhammad, and Y. A. Hassan, alleged that they were informed that the police were forcing the defendants to make statements in custody.

Angulu said he was informed by his client that the police continued to come to prison to intimidate him on the evidence before the court.

“Despite the 1st defendant being in their custody for eight months, he told me that the police have been there three times. In the interest of justice, I want them to leave him alone, ” he said.

Other defence lawyers made similar submissions.

But Oyedepo said the investigation had been concluded and he believed that the claims could only be in the imagination of the defence, but he would investigate.

He added that the prosecution would not do anything to jeopardise the interest of justice.

Judge Abdulmalik said in the interest of fair hearing, she “must have cogent evidence before making any directive and cannot make any because she has not heard from the prison authorities.”(NAN)