The [Federal High Court](https://www.federalhighcourt.gov.ng/) in Abuja instructed defence lawyers on Wednesday to avoid any tactics that could postpone the trial of four suspects linked to the abduction and death of Ekpeyong Asuquo Owoh, an operative of the [Department of State Services (DSS)](https://dss.gov.ng/). Justice Joyce Abdulmalik directed that the proceedings continue and scheduled the next hearing for 28 October.
Key facts:
- The defendants – Michael Okafor (alias Onyechimeleze), Chinedu Chukwudozie (alias Kante), Chibunna Olisa and Chigozie Olisa (alias Ability) – face six counts of terrorism‑related offences and kidnapping.
- Their arraignment took place on 28 September, after the prosecution alleged they abducted Owoh while he travelled from Port Harbor, Rivers State, to Awka, Anambra State, and subsequently caused his death.
- The prosecution sought to protect witness identities under Section 232(3)(b) of the [Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_of_Criminal_Justice_Act_2015).
- Defence counsel Kelvin Ekwe argued the request was unnecessary and should be filed formally, citing Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.
- Justice Abdulmalik rejected the defence’s objection, stating that, given the terrorism nature of the case, revealing witnesses would undermine justice.
- The judge warned that breaching Section 232(5) of the ACJA could attract up to one year imprisonment.
**Why did the judge reject the defence’s request to mask witnesses?**
Justice Abdulmalik explained that the case involves terrorism, and exposing witnesses could jeopardise their safety and the integrity of the trial. Consequently, she ordered that the primary witness be identified only as “AB”.
**What caused the earlier adjournment on 6 October?**
Defence lawyers Kelvin Ekwe and Geoffrey Uwadiegwu claimed they were not ready to proceed because they had only just received video evidence and, in Uwadiegwu’s case, were unfamiliar with the case file. The prosecution clarified that the video would not be shown at that hearing and asked the court to move forward.
**How did the judge describe her courtroom standards?**
Justice Abdulmalik remarked, “I run my court in line with international best practice, and that is why people say I am strict. So, when I run my court, there should be 99.9 percent compliance according to international best practice.”
The judge also noted a heavy docket of pre‑election matters, with nine judgments due before 9 November, but emphasized the importance of expediting this terrorism case. After hearing both sides, she granted a brief adjournment at the defence’s request but warned against any further delays.
**What are the charges against the suspects?**
The four men are accused of conspiring to commit terrorism, kidnapping the DSS officer, unlawful possession of firearms such as AK‑47s and pump‑action rifles, and affiliation with the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and its armed wing, the Eastern Security Network (ESN). The charges stem from investigations into Owoh’s abduction and death.
The court’s order now sets the stage for the trial to resume on 28 October, with the witness’s identity protected and strict penalties outlined for any violation of the witness‑protection provisions.