An officer of the Department of State Services has informed Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court, Abuja, that forensic examination of mobile phone data placed four men accused of carrying out the June 5, 2022, attack on St. Francis Catholic Church, Owo, at the scene of the crime.
The officer, identified in court by the code name S.S.J, testified that phone communications traced to the defendants around the time of the incident showed they were within the vicinity of the church in Owo, Ondo State.
According to him, technical findings demonstrated that the phones used by the first to fourth defendants connected to telecommunications cell sites covering the area where the attack occurred.
He stated that, beyond the digital analysis conducted by the DSS, the accused persons voluntarily provided confessional statements linking themselves to the incident.
The witness told the court that the statement-taking process was observed by the Director of the Legal Aid Council after the defendants indicated they could not afford to have their personal lawyers or family members present during the session.
S.S.J identified the five defendants in court and detailed how he recorded the statements from the first to fourth accused persons, maintaining that the confessions were made freely.
An objection raised by defence counsel, Abdullahi Mohammad, challenging the admissibility of the statements, was dismissed by Justice Nwite. The trial judge also declined the defence’s request to conduct a trial-within-trial to determine whether the statements were indeed made by the defendants.
In his ruling, Justice Nwite upheld the argument presented by prosecuting counsel, Ayodeji Adedipe, that a trial-within-trial is only appropriate when the voluntariness of a statement is in question, not when an accused person outrightly denies making it.
Following testimony from the 10th prosecution witness regarding the confessional statements, the prosecution applied to tender them as evidence. The defence objected, urging the court to order a trial-within-trial on the grounds that the statements were not authored by the accused. The court rejected the request.
Earlier under cross-examination, another prosecution witness, S.S.I, who led the investigation, reaffirmed that the defendants were implicated in the attack. He testified that they were arrested in August 2022 in Kogi and Ondo States and subsequently interviewed in Abuja.
S.S.I stated that the accused persons are members of ISWAP, operating within a cell known as Al Shabab, and mentioned the existence of a Mahmuda faction of ISWAP in the area.
He told the court that after the attack, the fourth defendant allegedly returned the weapons used to an individual identified as Odoba and also returned the rented vehicle used in the operation.
The witness said the investigation established that the suspects used two vehicles: one rented vehicle to reach the church and another allegedly seized from a worshipper leaving the service, which they used to escape.
He further testified that a meeting was held at Government Secondary School, Ogaminana, where Odoba reportedly instructed the second defendant to execute the attack. According to him, that meeting was followed by two additional gatherings on June 3 and 4, 2022, ahead of the assault.
S.S.I added that the attackers deployed explosives and multiple rounds of ammunition during the incident. He insisted that no other individuals outside the current defendants were arrested by the DSS in connection with the case.
The matter has been adjourned until Thursday, February 19, for continuation of hearing.
What you should know
The DSS has presented technical and testimonial evidence in court linking four defendants to the 2022 Owo church attack.
Phone data analysis allegedly placed them at the scene, while investigators claim the suspects made voluntary confessional statements. The trial court admitted the statements despite objections from the defence and declined to order a trial-within-trial.
Prosecutors also allege the defendants are members of ISWAP and planned the attack through multiple meetings. The case remains ongoing, with further proceedings scheduled as the court continues to evaluate the evidence presented.
