A High Court of Plateau State, on Tuesday, ruled that State High Courts have the jurisdiction to try persons accused of terrorism and terrorism-related charges under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act (TPPA) 2022,
\nThe ruling could significantly alter Nigeria’s war on terrorism, especially the trial of terrorism suspects heretofore believed to be the exclusive responsibility of Federal High Courts.<\/p>\n
Ruling on an motion on jurisdiction by four suspects arrested by the Department of State Services (DSS) for allegedly partaking in the Easter 2026 Angwa Rukuba massacre in the state, Justice Gedeliah Fwomyon of the State High Court,
\nsaid the TPPA did not forbid High Courts from trying terrorism suspects.
\nThe judge also held that there was nothing in the Constitution barring State Houses of Assembly from legislating on terrorism, saying the issue is not on the exclusive legislative list.
\nIn the wake of the massacre, the DSS arrested the quartet of Isa Umar Ibrahim, Adamu Isa Alhassan, Auwalu Abubakar aka Auwalu Dogo, and Musa Abubakar Ibrahim aka Yaroro. Thereafter, the state government filed terrorism charges against the men.
\nHowever, in the course of trial, counsel to the defendants raised objections on the issue of jurisdiction, arguing that, under the TPPA, a State High Court lacked the jurisdiction to try the accused persons. They argued that, since the charges against the men are terrorism, the state high Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
\nRuling on the objection on the issue of jurisdiction raised by counsel to the defendants, the trial judge,
\nThe judge held that, even though the TPPA, 2022, is a federal legislation, the law, however, didn’t prohibit a State High Court from prosecuting matters contained in the Act.
\nOn whether the suspects could also be tried under the Plateau State Penal Code, the trial judge held that State penal code is not inconsistent with the TPPA, and that both the National and State Assemblies can validly legislate on terrorism which the judge stressed is not in the exclusive legislative list.
\nThe court also
\nrejected a motion by the third defendant, Auwalu Abubakar,
\nfor transfer from the custody of the DSS to seek medical attention at the Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH).
\nThe judge held that, upon the suspects’ arrest by the DSS, a medical examination was conducted, and that the result declared them all medically fit for detention.
\nIn rejecting the motion seeking the third defendant’s transfer to JUTH, he judge also held the court cannot grant a relief upon documents that are not placed before it. The defendant applicant, he stated, failed to furnish the court with the report upon which he sought the relief.
\n“Motion of the defendant is hereby refused and dismissed for failure to establish sufficient factual foundation upon which the relief is sought,” said the judge, even as he adjourned the matter to 15 and 21 October 2026.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A High Court of Plateau State, on Tuesday, ruled that State High Courts have the jurisdiction to try persons accused of terrorism and terrorism-related charges under the Terrorism (Prevention and…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":128913,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"no","_lmt_disable":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-128912","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\n