Court Admits DSS Statements in High-Stakes Terror Trial

In a significant procedural victory for the Federal Government, the Federal High Court in Abuja has ruled to admit the extra-judicial statements made by three individuals facing terrorism charges, clearing a major hurdle in their prolonged prosecution. Justice Emeka Nwite ruled on Friday that the statements, which were made to the Department of State Service (DSS), were given voluntarily and not under duress, as the defendants had alleged.

The case involves three accused—Haruna Ali Abbas, Ibrahim Hussaini Musa, and Adam Sulaiman—who are standing trial for allegedly spying on the interests of the United States and Israel for individuals in Iran. This complex and sensitive case has been ongoing since 2014, experiencing multiple reassignments and delays.

The core of the recent dispute centered on a trial-within-a-trial conducted in August 2025. This specialized proceeding was necessary to determine the admissibility of the defendants’ alleged extra-judicial statements. The defense lawyers strongly contended that their clients were coerced, harassed, and intimidated into making the statements while in custody. The prosecution, conversely, maintained that the statements were made voluntarily in a conducive atmosphere, with the accused reading and signing through all cautionary words.

During the trial-within-a-trial, both sides presented evidence. The prosecution called three witnesses who testified that their operations adhered to the “best standard procedure.” They claimed to have paid attention to the welfare of the suspects in custody, providing food and medication, and even allowing them access to their families. In contrast, the defendants offered harrowing accounts of their time in the DSS facility, alleging they were beaten and subjected to inhuman treatment to force their confessions.

After meticulously reviewing the evidence and hearing the arguments from both the prosecution and defense counsel, Justice Nwite concluded that the prosecution successfully proved that the defendants were not forced to make their statements. Consequently, the court ordered that the statements be admitted in evidence as crucial exhibits in the ongoing trial.

With the admissibility of the statements confirmed, Justice Nwite adjourned the matter, setting January 22, 2026, as the date for the substantive hearing of the terrorism charges. The admission of the extra-judicial statements as evidence is expected to strengthen the prosecution’s case significantly as the trial moves into its critical phase.