Owo Church Massacre: Court rejects five suspected assailants’ bail application

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday rejected the bail application of five men standing trial for the June 2022 massacre in a church in Owo, Ondo State.

Join the Premium Times WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.

Open in WhatsApp

At least 40 worshippers were killed and over 100 others injured in the attack on the church.

Trial judge Emeka Nwite ruled that the suspected assailants’ bail application lacked merit. He also ruled that they could not be granted bail considering the gravity of the offences and the strength of evidence against them.

“The seriousness of the offence, the nature and strength of the evidence, and the likelihood of interference with witnesses are matters this court cannot gloss over,” he held.

The judge added that, considering the number of casualties and injuries resulting from the church attack alleged in the case against them, “granting bail in these circumstances poses a judicial risk.”

He agreed with the prosecution that there was compelling evidence that the defendants might jump bail, considering their alleged links with foreign terrorist groups.

“In the interest of justice, the bail application is refused for lacking in merit,” he ruled.

Stay Ahead with Premium Times

Add as a preferred source on Google

The defendants, charged with five counts of terrorism, are Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza (25 years old), Al Qasim Idris (20 years old), Jamiu Abdulmalik (26 years old), Abdulhaleem Idris (25 years old) and Momoh Otuho Abubakar (47 years old).

They were arraigned on 11 August over the 5 June 2022 terror attack on St. Francis Catholic Church, Owo, Ondo State. They all pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Their lawyer subsequently applied for the defendants’ bail, arguing during 19 August hearing that they were presumed innocent. He also assured the judge that the defendants would always attend court for their trial and would not interfere with prosecution witnesses.

Defence lawyer Abdullahi Mohammad told the judge that the defendants had been in custody since their arrest in 2022 and were ready to present reliable sureties for their proposed bail

However, the prosecution in a counter-affidavit opposed the bail on grounds, including the defendants’ alleged links to foreign terrorist groups like Al-Shabab. The prosecution also said their accomplices were still at large, constituting a threat to prosecution witnesses.

Prosecution lawyer Calistus Eze called on the judge to throw out the bail applications, citing the seriousness of the terrorism charges, the severity of the prescribed punishment, the strong evidence against the applicants, the likelihood of absconding, and possible intimidation of witnesses.

“Presumption of innocence not enough’

Ruling on Wednesday, the judge rejected the defence’s reliance on the presumption of innocence in their bail application.

Although, the Nigerian constitution presumes an accused person innocent until proven guilty, the judge said, the right is not absolute. “In a bail application, all factors must be considered,” he said.

He added that the court must consider established other factors, including the nature of the charge, severity of punishment, strength of evidence, criminal record, likelihood of attendance at trial, and risk of interference with witnesses.

The judge stressed that the likelihood was high that the suspects could interfere with the trial if granted bail, noting that they did not oppose the claims in the prosecution’s counter-affidavit that they could abscond from trial, intimidate witnesses and commit more crimes if their application was granted.

He said facts not opposed “are believed to be true.”

Mr Nwite cited some of the claims in the prosecution’s counter-affidavit unopposed by the defence to include the fact that defendants’ accomplices were still walking free and making frantic efforts to interfere with and compromise prosecution witnesses and trial.

He also noted the fear expressed by prosecution witnesses and their cry for protection as a condition to appear in court. The judge recalled that following intimidation of the proposed witnesses from the people connected to defendants, the prosecution had to apply for the shielding of the witnesses’ faces while giving evidence.

He also alluded to the possibility of the defendants committing other crimes if released on bail.

READ ALSO: Lagos agency defends Oworonshoki demolition, says residents ignored warnings

He cited sections 162 and 163 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015, which provides that a defendant can be denied bail if there is “a reasonable ground that he will commit another offence, jump trial, interfere in the case, attempt to conceal evidence, or undermine the purpose of criminal justice administration.”

The judge also pointed out that while there five defendants standing trial, only the first defendant’s name was stated on the motion paper, with the others included by reference.

He held that each applicant was required to file a separate affidavit stating reasons why bail should be granted. He held the joint application as filed was “incompetent.”

The judge fixed 16 October for commencement of trial.