The Nigerian military has confirmed that officers implicated in an alleged coup plot will be arraigned in line with established legal and disciplinary procedures, following the conclusion of preliminary investigations.
In an official statement, military authorities said the decision to proceed with arraignment reflects the Armed Forces’ internal accountability mechanisms and its commitment to professionalism and constitutional order.
“The Nigerian military wishes to inform the public that officers implicated in an alleged coup plot will be arraigned in accordance with established procedures,” the statement said.
Assurance on due process
The Armed Forces stressed that the development does not amount to a declaration of guilt, noting that all personnel involved are entitled to fair hearing as guaranteed by law.
“The right to fair hearing remains fundamental. The process will be conducted strictly in line with the law and existing military regulations,” the statement added.
Authorities declined to disclose the identities of the officers involved or provide operational details, citing the need to preserve the integrity of the judicial process and national security considerations.
Institutional stability emphasised
The military urged the public to rely solely on official communication and to refrain from speculation or the spread of unverified information that could undermine confidence in state institutions.
According to the statement, the Armed Forces remain fully committed to their constitutional responsibilities and operational duties while internal legal processes take their course.
Officials said further updates would be communicated through official channels as the arraignment process progresses.
What the Law Requires in Military Coup Allegation Cases
Under Nigerian military law and established national security procedures, allegations relating to coup plots are handled through tightly regulated internal and judicial processes designed to protect both institutional stability and individual rights.
Once preliminary investigations are concluded, officers implicated in such allegations may be subjected to formal arraignment through court-martial or other authorised military judicial mechanisms. At this stage, authorities are required to refrain from public disclosure of identities or operational details to preserve due process and prevent prejudicing proceedings.
Legal experts note that arraignment does not amount to a finding of guilt. Rather, it marks the commencement of a judicial process in which evidence is tested and the affected officers are granted the right to defend themselves, including access to legal representation and a fair hearing.
Military authorities are also bound by constitutional provisions and internal regulations that prohibit parallel commentary or public speculation while a matter is before a judicial body. This restriction, officials say, is intended to safeguard national security interests and ensure confidence in the outcome of the process.
In previous cases involving sensitive security allegations, official communication has typically been limited to confirmation of procedural steps, with substantive details released only after judicial determination.
This isIDNN. Independent. Digital. Uncompromising.
