Judiciary symbol
Sept. 10, 2025
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday dismissed the bail application filed by the five suspected terrorists who attacked St. Francis Catholic Church, Owo in Ondo State on June 5, 2022.
Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling, held that the Federal Government had been able to establish a compelling evidence against the defendants that they might jump bail considering their link with foreign fighters.
Justice Nwite also agreed with the prosecution that the suspects might interfere with the trial if the application was granted since all the weighty averments in its counter affidavit were not controverted by the defendants.
According to the judge, the facts not controverted are believed to be true.
He also observed that though the charge was a joint one against the five suspected terrorists, each of the defendants ought to have filed separate bail applications and affidavits, stating why each of them should be granted bail.
“However, they filed what appeared like a joint affidavit. This application is incompetent,” he said.
The judge said that Section 162 of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, provides that a defendant can be admitted to bail “except where there is a reasonable ground that he will commit another offence, jump trial, interfere in the case, attempt to conceal evidence, undermine the purpose of criminal justice administration, etc.”
According to him, the court has also, over the years, established principles in the application for bail.
Justice Nwite said these include the nature of the charge, the severity of the evidence, the severity or punishment in the event of conviction, probability that the defendant may not submit himself for trial and may interfere with the case, among others.
The judge observed that the Federal Government, in its argument, submitted that the suspects were standing trial for acts of terrorism for which over 40 worshippers were killed and no fewer than 100 persons sustained varying degree of injuries.
He also observed that the prosecution argued that the defendants’ accomplices are still at large and making frantic effort to interfere and compromise the trial in the interest of the suspects, hence, the reason it applied for an accelerated hearing of the case.
He further observed that it was the argument of the prosecution that the witnesses in the case had exercised fears that they would not attend court except their fears were allayed, following the allegations that some of the witnesses were being intimidated.
He noted that the prosecution had argued that the development had made it to apply that the witnesses be shielded while giving evidence.
The judge equally noted that the Federal Government, in its argument, submitted that the offences with which the suspects were being charged were serious one with capital punishment if convicted.
Justice Nwite also observed that the prosecution argued that the defendants had not provided any proof to show that they had credible sureties.
“I am not unmindful of the constitutional provision that any person charged with criminal offence is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
“Our criminal justice system has a safe guard for the accused, the prosecution and the society.
“I have carefully considered the affidavit evidence before me.
“In my view, the prosecution has succeeded in raising strong objection to the applicants/defendants application.
“I am of the view that the interest of the justice will be met by giving this matter accelerated hearing.
“Consequently, this application is hereby refused,” Justice Nwite ruled.
The judge then adjourned the matter until Oct. 16 for trial.
The defendants, through their counsel, Abdullahi Muhammad, had argued that the essence of bail is to compel attendance of the defendants in court and if they were granted, they would not jump bail.
The lawyer argued that an accused is innocent until proven guilty and that the court had the discretion to grant the bail.
He argued that if not granted the bail, the court might prejudice the guilty of the defendants.
He also argued that the suspects had no criminal records and would not interfere with the trial and that they would produce credible sureties if their request was granted.
The suspects include: Idris Omeiza, 25 years; Al Qasim Idris, 20 years; Jamiu Abdulmalik, 26 years; Abdulhaleem Idris, 25 years and Momoh Otuho Abubakar, 47 years.
They are 1st to 5th defendants respectively.
They were arraigned on Aug. 11 in a nine-count terrorism charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/301/2025.(NAN)
