Femi Falana Demands Transfer of Coup Trial to Federal High Court Citing Lack of Military Jurisdiction

Senior lawyer Femi Falana urges the AGF to move the trial of 36 military officers to the Federal High Court, citing lack of jurisdiction for treason charges.

By: AXL Media

Published: Apr 25, 2026, 6:21 AM EDT

Source: Information for this report was sourced from Daily Nigerian

Constitutional Challenge to Military Tribunals

Senior Advocate of Nigeria Femi Falana has formally urged the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, to intervene in the ongoing trial of 36 military personnel currently facing a General Court Martial. In a statement released on Friday, April 24, 2026, Falana asserted that the military tribunal is overstepping its legal boundaries by attempting to prosecute offences that fall strictly within the purview of the civilian judiciary. He called for the immediate termination of the current charges, citing Section 174 of the Constitution as the necessary mechanism for the Attorney-General to halt the proceedings.

The Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Federal High Court

A central tenet of Falana’s argument rests on Section 251 of the Nigerian Constitution, which mandates that the Federal High Court holds exclusive jurisdiction over matters of treason and treasonable felony. According to the human rights lawyer, a General Court Martial lacks the constitutional competence to preside over such high-stakes national security offences. He maintained that the current democratic framework does not permit military bodies to assume the role of the judiciary in matters that define the stability of the state, insisting that the rule of law requires these cases to be heard in a constitutionally recognized court.

Violations of Legal Equality Principles

The senior advocate highlighted a procedural inconsistency in how the government is handling the current coup suspects. While 36 officers are slated for a court-martial, six other suspects are being prosecuted within the Federal High Court for the same alleged crime. Falana described this split as a violation of the fundamental principle of equality before the law. He argued that the disparate treatment of citizens based on their military or civilian status for the same offence cannot be justified under the present legal system, creating a "corrupt" procedural environment.