Tag: Tukur Mamu

  • Abuja-Kaduna train attack: Victims’ complaints against Tukur Mamu supported DSS’ probe – Witness

    Abuja-Kaduna train attack: Victims’ complaints against Tukur Mamu supported DSS’ probe – Witness

    An investigator with the Department of State Services (DSS) has told a Federal High Court in Abuja that the complaints lodged by rescued victims of the 2022 Abuja-Kaduna bound train attack against alleged terrorist negotiator, Tukur Mamu, supported investigations by the agency.

    The DSS official spoke on Tuesday while being cross-examined by Mamu’s lawyer, Johnson Usman (SAN), at the resumed hearing in the terrorism case brought against the alleged terrorist negotiator.

    The revelation by the witness, who is the sixth prosecution witness (PW6), was in response to a question by Usman, who had asked the witness to ‘confirm to the court if any of the rescued victims, including the wife of the Commandant, Jaji, made any complaint against the defendant to the DSS.’

    Responding, the witness, who wore a mask and testified behind a screen, said some of the victims filed complaints, and one of them was in writing.

    At that point, prosecuting lawyer, David Kaswe of the Federal Ministry of Justice, interjected and complained about the mode of questioning being adopted by the defence lawyer.

    Kaswe said that, despite an earlier order of the court that the identity of actors in the case, including victims and witnesses, should be protected, Usman was framing his questions in a manner capable of exposing the identity of the categories of people in respect of which the court’s order was made.

    In response, Usman argued that none of the names he called was a witness before the court.

    He added that although the court actually made an order for trial in camera and for the protection of the identity of the witnesses, the trial should not be conducted in a manner that prejudices the defendant.

    When he resumed his testimony, the witness said investigators interviewed six victims of the attack in the course of the investigation.

    On whether the six victims were interviewed in the presence of the defendant, the witness said no.

    The witness said the audio exhibit tendered by the prosecution was an extract of the transcribed WhatsApp conversation between Mamu and the terrorists.

    On whether his team interviewed a former Chief of Defence Staff, General Lucky Irabor (retd.); Major General Idris Garba, and Hannafi of the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI), the witness said no.

    The witness confirmed that Sheikh Gumi, Gen Abdulkadir, and General Jalingo were also interviewed, but not in the presence of the defendant.

    He said members of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) committee were not brought to the DSS facility and interviewed in the presence of the defendant.

    The witness gave Exhibit R8 (a statement made by the defendant) and read a portion where Mamu said he is a publisher of a newspaper and a magazine

    In another portion, the defendant also said he is a publisher, a media consultant, and a journalist, from which he earns his income.

    The witness said investigators, including him, investigated the defendant’s claims of being a publisher, media consultant, and journalist.

    Read Also: NRC apologises for Abuja-Kaduna train delay, clarifies safety procedure

    PW6 said they also investigated the defendant’s claim that he was acting with the permission of the authority.

    He confirmed that the defendant’s request that every actor in the negotiation be brought together to be interviewed in his presence was not granted.

    The witness said he was not part of the search party and did not know if the closed-circuit television (CCTV) in the defendant’s office was among the other valuables recovered from him.

    PW6 said he was not among those who reviewed or watched the CCTV.

    At the conclusion of the cross-examination, Kaswe told the court that the prosecution would be closing its case with the sixth prosecution witness.

    Usman said his client was willing to reveal all that transpired and would elect to enter his defence straight away rather than first making a no-case submission.

    He said, “We want to put everything on the table. Let the whole world see. Let God also see.”

    Justice Mohammed Umar then adjourned till April 23 for the defendant to open his defence.

  • Alleged terrorism: Rescued victims filed complaints against Tukur Mamu – DSS Witness

    Alleged terrorism: Rescued victims filed complaints against Tukur Mamu – DSS Witness

    A Department of State Services (DSS)’ investigator, on Thursday, told the Federal High Court in Abuja that many of the rescued victims of the 2022 Abuja-Kaduna train attack lodged complaints against the alleged terrorist negotiator, Tukur Mamu.

    The DSS operative, who testified as 6th prosecution witness (PW-6) in the ongoing terrorism trial of Mamu, made the disclosure to Justice Mohammed Umar while being cross-examined by the defence counsel, Johnson Usman, SAN.

    The lawyer had asked the witness, who gave his testimony behind a witness screen for security reasons, “to confirm to court if any of the rescue victims, including the wife of the Commandant in Jaji, made any complaint against the defendant to the DSS.”

    Responding, the witness said: “Yes, my lord.”

    When Usman further asked the witness if the complaint by the rescued victims was either in writing or oral, he said it was in writing.

    The DSS’ lawyer, David Kaswe, however, prayed the court to restrain Usman from delving into questions that might touch on the identity of victims or witnesses in the case since the court had granted protection to all.

    Responding, Usman told the court that none of the names he called was a witness before the court.

    “Even though my lord had granted an order for trial in camera, a trial in camera is not to prejudice the defendant,” he said.

    The witness said he interviewed six victims in the course of the investigation.

    Read Also: ‘Why we charged Sowore over false claim against Tinubu,’ by DSS

    When he was asked if the six victims were interviewed in the presence of Mamu, the PW-6 responded in the negative.

    The witness told the court that he was not a vocologist, having not studied sound in higher institution.

    He, however, confirmed that the audio exhibit tendered by the prosecution was the extract of the transcribed audio between Mamu and the terrorists.

    When he was asked if he interviewed a former Chief of Defence Staff, General Lucky Irabor (retd.), he said the army chief was not interviewed.

    The witness, however, admitted that General Abdulkadir Abubakar was interviewed in the course of investigation.

    “When you interviewed him, was it in the presence of the defendant?” the lawyer asked and he said: “No my lord.”

    “Did you interview Sheikh Gumi?” Usman asked and the witness responded in the affirmative.

    “Was it in the presence of the defendant?” Usman asked.

    “No my lord,” the witness responded.

    “Did you interview Major General Idris Garba?”

    “No my lord,” the PW-6 said.

    “Did you interview General Jalingo?” the lawyer asked, and he said: “Yes, my lord.”

    The witness said Gen. Jalingo was not interviewed in Mamu’s presence.

    “Finally, did you interviewed Hannafi of Defence Military Intelligence,” the lawyer asked and the witness responded in the negative.

    “Confirm to court, whether at any time in the course of your investigation, you brought members of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Committee for interview in the presence of the defendant,” Usman asked and the witness responded in the negative.

    “Please confirm whether you are aware that the defendant has requested that you brought members of the CDS Committee face to face with him for interview,” the lawyer asked and the witness said: “Yes, he did.”

    “Confirm whether the request of the defendant to have the CDS and others involved gathered together for interrogation was granted,” Usman asked, and the witness said:”No, my lord.”

    When Usman asked the witness to confirm that Mamu told him that he is a publisher of a newspaper and magazine, the witness said: “Yes, he said so.”

    When the lawyer asked the witness to confirm that Mamu told him his means of income was derived from his journalism business, the PW-6 said: “Yes, he claimed ”

    “As investigator, did you investigate this claim,” the lawyer asked.

    “Yes, we did,” he responded.

    After the cross-examination, Kaswe told the court the prosecution’s intention to close its case.

    “So that we can allow the defendant to enter his defence if they are ready,” he said.

    But Usman told the court that they would rather apply for a date to open their defence, .

    “We will not file a no-case submission so that the world can see it and God can see it all,” he said.

    Justice Umar then adjourned the matter until April 23 for Mamu to open his defence.

    (NAN)

  • Alleged terrorists’ negotiator Mamu not mandated by Fed Govt,’ DSS official tells court

    Alleged terrorists’ negotiator Mamu not mandated by Fed Govt,’ DSS official tells court

    A Federal High Court in Abuja heard on Wednesday that alleged terrorists’ negotiator, Tukur Mamu, was never mandated by neither the federal government nor any of its agencies to negotiate with the terrorists behind the March 28, 2022 attack on the Abuja-Kaduna train.

    The court was told by an Investigator with the Department of State Services (DSS) that Mamu allegedly sidelined the committee set up by the Chief of Defence Staff to negotiate for the release of the occupants of the train, who were abducted by the terrorists.

    The DSS official, whose identified was shielded for security reason, resumed his testimony on Wednesday as the sixth prosecution witness, having earlier testified on Tuesday.

    The witness, who was led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer, David Kaswe, was emphatic when he said, “The was not mandated by the government to engage in any form of investigation or negotiation with terrorists, but acted on his own for his personal benefit.”

    The sixth prosecution witness claimed that the defendant encouraged the terrorists to discuss ransom payments with the victims of the train attack; collected money on their behalf, confirmed the amounts and “facilitated payments illegally.” 

    The witness also alleged that Mamu benefited financially from the ransom negotiations, owned firearms unlawfully and also provided terrorists with information on how to create a website.

    The DSS official stated that the huge amount of money recovered from the Kaduna residence of the defendant exceeded the threshold permitted by law for individual to keep at home.

    The witness added that the defendant’s lifestyle “changed significantly” during the negotiation period.

    The DSS official further told the court that the defendant was arrested in the company of four members of his family while they were on a trip to Egypt, adding that Mamu bought two flash cars during the negotiation period.

    Under cross examination by defence lawyer, Johnson Usman (SAN), the witness said he was not aware of how Mamu and his family traveled to Egypt, adding that the defendant’s passport was in the custody of the DSS.

    The witness agreed with Usman that the victims suggested names of those to negotiate on their behalf, but insisted that it was only the defendant (Mamu) who agreed to engage with the terrorists.

    The sixth prosecution witness insisted that Mamu was not a member of the committee set up by the Chief of Defence Staff for that purpose.

    The witness also agreed with Usman that before the defendant’s involvement in the negotiation, only one of the hostages was released.

    The DSS official denied knowing that family members of the victims took money directly to the terrorists.

    The witness told the court that an individual, who took money to the terrorists on behalf of his family members, who were among the hostages, also took money from other families to the terrorists as directed by the defendant.

    The DSS official agreed with Usman that the wife of the then Commandant of the Command and Staff College, Jaji was also among the hostages.

    The witness said some of the cash recovered by investigators were from Mamu’s house, while some others were recovered from his in-law and other of his dependants in his house.

    The sixth prosecution witness, who denied interviewing any of the terrorists, agree with Usman that one of the vehicles recovered from Mamu’s house, a Venza car, was acquired before the Kaduna train attack of March 28, 2022 and that the car is not one of the vehicles in the DSS custody that were recovered from the defendant’s house.

    The witness also denied being aware that the defendant has been travelling to hajj, umrah with his family members before the March 28, 2022 train attack.

    Justice Mohammed Umar has adjourned till January 29, 2026 for the continuation of cross examination of the sixth prosecution witness.

  • UPDATED: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    UPDATED: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected a fresh application for bail filed by detained alleged terrorists negotiator, Tukur Mohammed Mamu.

    Justice Mohammed Umar, in a ruling on Wednesday, noted the health complaint made by Mamu and  held that the detaining authority, the Department of State Services (DSS) should not release him, but take him to an appropriate health facility where he would be adequately attended to.

    Justice Umar noted that, by the history of the case so far, the prosecution has exhibited diligence in it handling of the case and has exhibited diligence in prosecuting the case.

    The judge said one of the reasons for granting bail is where the prosecution is not diligent, noting that since the prosecution in this case is diligent, the application for bail cannot be granted.

    He subsequently ordered that the defence lawyer should choose the health facility comfortable to the defendant, to which he should be promptly taken.

    He also asked the DSS to allow the defendant access to members of his family.

    The ruling on Wednesday is the third time the court will reject his application for bail since his was arraigned on March 21, 2023 by the Federal Government on a 10-count charge bordering on terrorism financing, among others.

    Mamu was arrested on September 7, 2022 by Egyptian security officials at the Cairo International Airport, on reasonable suspicion of financing Boko Haram terrorism activities.

     He was alleged to have convinced the terrorists to discuss ransom payments with individual families of the hostages of the train attack instead of the Chief of Defense Staff Committee set up by the Federal Government for his personal financial gain. 

    He was said to have been nominated by the terrorists that attacked the Abuja-Kaduna bound train sometime in March 2022 which took scores of persons hostage.

    Mamu was alleged to have collected ransoms on behalf of the Boko Haram terrorists from families of hostages, confirmed the amount and facilitated the delivery of same to the terrorists. 

    After the ruling, a witness called by the prosecution, an Investigator with the DSS, whose identity was shielded, told the court  how the committee set up by the Federal Government to negotiate the release of the Abuja-Kaduna train attack hostages in 2022 was allegedly betrayed by Mr Tukur Mamu.

    The DSS operative, who was led in evidence by the prosecuting lawyer, David Kaswe, said: “In 2022, March 28 to be precise, the Kaduna-bound train was attacked enroute to Kaduna. 

    “Several persons were killed and others were injured and over 60 people were taken into the bush as hostages.

    Read Also: JUST IN: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    “Thereafter, a committee which was already in existence, handling a similar cases of abduction, with government support was mandated to also explore measures for the release of the hostages.

    “The committee was supervised by then Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Gen. Lucky Irabor (rtd.).

    “The committee established communication with the terrorists on the possibility of securing the release of the kidnapped hostages.

    “And the terrorists made some demands which include the release of members of their families who were in custody of government detention facilities in exchange for the release of the hostages,” he said.

    The witness said while that was in progress, the terrorists consulted with some of the hostages in their custody and recommended names of persons who they felt could negotiate on their behalf with the government.

    “Names were suggested and the suggested names were forwarded to the people suggested, seeking their willingness to accept in the negotiation on behalf of the terrorist group 

    “All those that were contacted declined to take the offer except the defendant who offered himself to negotiate on behalf of the terrorists group with the government.

    “Thereafter, as earlier stated, window of communication was already established between the government recognised committee and the terrorists. 

    “So when the defendant came on board, communication was taken place on multiple fronts at the same time, that is apart from the committee.”

    According to him, after sometime, the defendant (Mamu) expressed his dissatisfaction with the arragement where communication was taking place on multiple fronts.

    “The defendant, having been accepted to negotiate on their behalf with government, suggested or advised the terrorists to appoint a single interlocutor or negotiator,” he said.

    The witness said Mamu then became the only negotiator between the terror group and the government committee.   

    “So when the defendant emerged as sole interlocutor between the terrorists group and government, attempts by the committee members to reach out to the terrorists became a challenge because they do not want to reach out to the committee anymore except through the defendant.

    “Subsequently to continue with the government’s assignment, the committee now continues to recognise the defendant,” he said.

    When the lawyer asked the witness to tell the court at what point Mamu became a subject of arrest, he said: “So the committee decided to work with defendant for the release of the hostages since he had become the sole negotiator.

    “And based on the agreement on prisoners’ swap, it was agreed that the women, the children and the sick should be prioritised in the prisoners’ swap.”

    According to him, the agreement was that from the intelligence available to the committee, it was estimated that about 30 or 32 hostages were to be released for about eight members of the families of the terrorists.

    “So being the spokesperson between the terrorists and government side, the defendant probably communicated a different thing to the terrorists because on the scheduled day, the committee mobilised vehicles to convey about 30 to 32 hostages but on reaching there, only 11 hostages were brought out.

    “The committee felt betrayed and felt that the defendant undermined the committee’s effort by taking decision unilaterally and the committee wrote an interim report to the government and a copy which was also avail to us (DSS). 

    “The report highlighted the role of the defendant in undermining the committee’s assignment for his own personal gains,” he alleged. 

    The witness said the committee was constraint to work with Mamu for further negotiation with the terrorists, being the sole negotiator. 

    “My lord, the terrorists, through the defendants, now demanded for 1 billion Euro for the release of the remaining hostages.

    “There was stalemate for sometime as to what next to do in view of the circumstance,” he said.

    The investigator said Mamu then suggested to the terrorists to explore negotiation with individual families of the hostages, “since according to him, the government was not serious and care about the lives of the hostages.”

    He said the terrorists accepted the advice and directed Mamu to notify the family members of the hostages.

    “So the defendant reached out to family members of the hostages for those that could raise the ransom demanded by terrorists to secure the release of their loved ones. 

    “The idea to collect ransom on behalf of the hostages was also communicated to the committee but the committee rejected the offer. 

    “So members of the family members of the hostages who were able to raised various sums of money as ransom did so and brought it to the defendant.

    “The defendant confirmed the amount, packaged it and coordinated the transportation of the ransom to the terrorists at agreed location. 

    He said N100 million was paid by the hostages whose family members could pay, while Mamu allegedly determined the payment of ransom for those who could not raised up to the N100 million, by talking to the terrorists group.

    “As time goes on, those that could not meet up paid what they could afford,” he said.

    He said at that time , Mamu granted an interview which was published in his newspaper –  Desert Herald, between August 16 and Aug. 22, 2022.

    “It is a weekly publication on pages 19 and 25 where he said that apart from the 11 hostages that were released, he single-handedly facilitated the release of others without the input of government or the committee.

    “So the defendant collected various sums of money from all the family members of hostages and transported them to the terrorists,” he said. 

    The witness said Mamu also included some packages which were wrapped together with the ransom he delivered to the terror group.

    “He was running errands for them apart from ransom collection. 

    “The investigation revealed that during one of the errands, the defendant wrapped some rings with a (written) note which he folded (we don’t know the content of the writing) and he delivered it to the terrorists at the point of exchange.”

    At that point, Kaswe applied to tender the documents, which application was not opposed by Mamu’s lawyer, Johnson Usman, (SAN). Usman said he would raise objection at the address stage, if necessary.

    Justice Umar admitted the interim report by the CDS Action Committee, the generated photocopies of the photos of the newspaper publication, two photos of the rings and stapled note, in addition with the certificate of compliance as evidence and marked them as exhibits.

    Earlier, the fifth prosecution witness (an exhibit keeper with DSS) also testified and tendered some  exhibits.

    The witness said: “With regards to this case, there were exhibits that were brought to us according to our record, the exhibit came on September 9, 2022.

    “And another one came due to the subsequent investigation conducted by the service in respect to the case.

    *My job mainly is to collect, store and record exhibits,” he said. 

    The witness listed the exhibits to include $300, 000 US dollars; N25, 690, 500; “one thousand eight hundred and forty Egyptian pounce; one thousand seven hundred India  rupee; one hundred and fifteen UAE currency; two Kata Rial of Qatar currency and 16 coins of different currencies.” 

    Others tendered and admitted as exhibits were Pump Action, called Delta Magnum; cartridges of the Pump Action in two packs.

    The witnesses said one pack contained 25 rounds of cartridges and the other contained 22 rounds of cartridges.

    He also tendered a license for the Pump Action, including two phones; Oppo and Samsung Phones with Samsung Tablet.

    The witness also tendered seven cars allegedly belonging to Mamu.

    “We have One Toyota Camry, metallic gold colour; we have Honda CRV, metallic blue colour; we have Mercedes Benz E350, white colour; we have Lexus 250, white colour; we have Hyundai Equs; a Peugeot 508, black color, we have another Peugeot 5008, maroon colour;” he said. 

    The witness said the cars, which have not been serviced for a long time, were in the DSS custody.

    The judge admitted them in evidence and marked them accordingly.

    Further hearing in the case has been adjourned till November 25.

  • JUST IN: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    JUST IN: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected a fresh application for bail filed by detained alleged terrorists negotiator, Tukur Mohammed Mamu.

    Justice Mohammed Umar, in a ruling on Wednesday, noted the health complaint by Mamu and  held that the detaining authority, the Department of State Services (DSS) should not release him but take him to an appropriate health facility where he would be adequately attended to.

    Justice Umar noted that, by the history of the case so far, the prosecution has exhibited diligence in it handling of the case and exhibited diligence in prosecuting the case.

    The judge said one of the reasons for granting bail is where the prosecution is not diligent, noting that since the prosecution in this case is diligent, the application for bail cannot be granted.

    He subsequently ordered that the defence lawyer should choose the  health facility comfortable to the defendant, to which he should be promptly taken.

    He also asked the DSS to allow the defendant access to members of his family.

    The ruling on Wednesday is the third time the court will reject his application for bail since his was arraigned on March 21, 2023 by the Federal Government on a 10-count charge bordering on terrorism financing, among others.

    Mamu was arrested on September 7, 2022 by Egyptian security officials at the Cairo International Airport, on reasonable suspicion of financing Boko Haram terrorism activities.

     He was alleged to have convinced the terrorists to discuss ransom payments with individual families of the hostages of the train attack instead of the Chief of Defense Staff Committee set up by the Federal Government for his personal financial gain. 

    He was said to have been nominated by the terrorists that attacked the Abuja-Kaduna bound train sometime in March 2022 which took scores of persons hostage.

    Mamu was alleged to have collected ransoms on behalf of the Boko Haram terrorists from families of hostages, confirmed the amount and facilitated the delivery of same to the terrorists. 

  • Court grants Tukur Mamu access to personal physician

    Court grants Tukur Mamu access to personal physician

    Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja has granted the request of the alleged terrorist negotiator, Tukur Mamu, to have access to his personal physician over alleged deteriorating health condition.

    In a ruling, Justice Ekwo ordered that Mamu’s medical doctor should be allowed to treat him, subject to the supervision of the Department of State Service’s (DSS) team of physicians.

    Read Also: Lawyers, journalists, others barred from Tukur Mamu’s trial

    Justice Ekwo, who agreed with the argument of Mamu’s lawyer, Johnson Usman, asked the Federal Government’s lawyer, David Kaswe, if the defendant was entitled to his personal physician, and he responded in the affirmative.

    The judge subsequently adjourned the case till February 26 to 28, 2024 for continuation of trial.

    Mamu is standing trial over his alleged relationship with terrorists that were involved in the Kaduna-bound train attack in 2022. He was arrested on September 6, 2022, by Interpol in Cairo, Egypt, on behalf of the Nigerian Government.