Plateau High Court: Asserts Jurisdiction Over Easter Attack Suspects

• The Plateau State High Court has ruled that it has jurisdiction to try terrorism cases under the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act (TPPA) 2022.
• The court's decision was made in response to a preliminary objection filed by four suspects arrested over their alleged involvement in the Easter 2026 attack on the Angwa Rukuba community.
• The ruling has significant implications for state-level prosecutions of terrorism cases and may expand the scope of such prosecutions.

The court's assertion of jurisdiction is a crucial development in the ongoing case, which has sparked debate over the role of state high courts in trying terrorism cases.

In a significant ruling, the Plateau State High Court has asserted its jurisdiction to try terrorism cases under the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act (TPPA) 2022. This decision has far-reaching implications for state-level prosecutions of such offences. The court's ruling came in response to a preliminary objection filed by four suspects arrested over their alleged involvement in the Easter 2026 attack on the Angwa Rukuba community, which left more than 30 people dead. The Plateau State Government had charged five suspects with various terrorism-related offences, including criminal conspiracy and terrorism. According to the charge sheet, the defendants acted 'contrary to Section 269 and punishable under Section 270 of the Penal Code Law of Plateau State, 2017.' The court's assertion of jurisdiction is a crucial development in the ongoing case, which has sparked debate over the role of state high courts in trying terrorism cases.

The TPPA 2022 is federal legislation, but it does not explicitly prohibit state high courts from trying offences created under it. The Plateau State High Court's ruling was based on this interpretation of the law. In his judgment, Justice Gedeliah Fwomyon noted that there was nothing in the constitution preventing a state House of Assembly from legislating on terrorism. He also held that both the National Assembly and state Houses of Assembly could validly legislate on matters relating to terrorism within their respective legislative competence. This ruling has significant implications for the balance between federal and state jurisdictions in trying terrorism cases.

The Plateau State High Court's decision is a potential game-changer in the prosecution of terrorism cases at the state level. If upheld, this ruling could expand the scope of state-level prosecutions for such offences. Lawyers will be watching closely to see how this development plays out in future cases. The court's assertion of jurisdiction has significant implications for the balance between federal and state powers in trying terrorism cases. This decision may also have broader implications for the prosecution of other serious crimes at the state level.

Lawyers should note that the Plateau State High Court has ruled in favour of state high courts having jurisdiction to try terrorism cases, potentially expanding the scope of state-level prosecutions for such offences.

Source: Original reporting via PUNCH