A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the interim forfeiture of nine properties allegedly linked to former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu granted the order following an ex parte application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The court held that the properties, believed to be proceeds of unlawful activities, should be temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government pending the determination of a motion for final forfeiture.

Justice Egwuatu also directed the EFCC to publish the interim forfeiture order in at least two national newspapers within seven days of receiving the certified true copy of the ruling. Interested parties were given 14 days to appear before the court and show cause why the properties should not be permanently forfeited.

The case was adjourned until May 25 for a compliance report.

According to the EFCC counsel, Oluwaleke Atolagbe, the commission sought the order on the grounds that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired through unlawful means.

The affected properties are located in Abuja districts including Maitama, Wuse, Garki, Mpape, and Dakibiyu.

The properties include residential apartments, duplexes, terraces, and office complexes, including a structure currently occupied by the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA).

Sylva has also been linked to allegations surrounding a failed coup plot against President Bola Tinubu, although no formal charge has been filed against him in relation to the allegation.

The Plateau State Government has arraigned several suspects allegedly linked to the deadly Anguwan Rukuba attack, a tragic incident that claimed over 30 lives and sparked widespread outrage across the state.

The suspects, who were apprehended by operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS), were brought before the Plateau State High Court in Jos on multiple charges bordering on terrorism and conspiracy.

The arraignment took place before Justice Gidelia Fomyong and Justice Jacob Longden in Courts 12 and 9 respectively, drawing significant public attention as grieving families and concerned residents continue to demand justice.

According to the State Attorney General, Philemon Daffi, who filed the charges, the accused persons allegedly violated provisions of Sections 269 and 270 of the Plateau State Penal Code Law, 2017.

The defendants include Isa Umar Ibrahim and Musa Abubakar Ibrahim from Riyom Local Government Area; Auwalu Abubakar, also known as Auwalu Dogo, from Jos North Local Government Area; and Musa Abubakar Ibrahim, also known as Yaroro, also from Jos North. Another suspect, Ado Ibrahim from Riyom, is currently at large.

In the charge sheet presented before the court, the prosecution alleged that the defendants conspired on March 28, 2025, in Farin Gada, Jos North, to plan, organize, and finance the attack in Anguwan Rukuba.

They were further accused of facilitating and contributing resources that led to the violent assault on the community.

The prosecution maintained that the attack resulted in the deaths of more than 30 people, describing the actions of the suspects as acts of terrorism under the state’s penal laws.

The suspects were reportedly arrested between April 3 and April 10, 2026, following investigations by security operatives.

The Anguwan Rukuba killings had heightened tensions across Jos and surrounding areas, prompting calls from civil society groups and residents for swift justice and improved security measures.

For families who lost loved ones, the court proceedings signal the beginning of a long-awaited quest for justice. Observers note that the outcome of the trial could have far-reaching implications for security and accountability in Plateau State.

The case has been adjourned to a later date for further hearing, as the court begins the process of examining the charges and evidence presented by the prosecution.

The Department of State Services (DSS) has arraigned former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, before the Federal High Court in Abuja over an alleged breach of national security.

El-Rufai was brought before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik and faced a five-count amended charge. When the charges were read to him, he pleaded not guilty to all counts.

At the hearing, counsel to the DSS, Oluwole Aladedoye (SAN), informed the court that the matter was scheduled for the defendant to take his plea. He also revealed that the prosecution had filed a new amended five-count charge on April 13, asking the court to replace the earlier three-count charge.

The defence counsel, Oluwole Iyamu (SAN), confirmed receipt of the amended charge and raised no objection. The court subsequently struck out the initial three-count charge.

Following El-Rufai’s plea, the prosecution requested three consecutive days to begin trial. However, the defence objected, citing logistical challenges. Iyamu told the court that his client was currently in the custody of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), which could make access to him difficult during the proposed trial period.

The defence also drew attention to a bail application filed on February 17. Although a supporting affidavit was initially missing from the court file, the issue was resolved after the matter was briefly stood down. The DSS stated it did not oppose the bail request.

Meanwhile, the prosecution applied for an order to protect the identities of two witnesses expected to testify. It requested that their names be concealed in public records and that pseudonyms be used during proceedings, citing security concerns and the potential risk to the witnesses’ families.

The defence opposed the request, arguing that it is the constitutional right of an accused person to know the identity of their accusers. Iyamu maintained that there was no evidence suggesting that El-Rufai posed any threat or had a following capable of endangering witnesses. He warned that granting anonymity could unfairly prejudice the defendant.

In addition, the defence asked the court to compel the prosecution to provide all relevant evidence needed to prepare for trial. The prosecution opposed this request, arguing that the documents sought were not part of the materials filed before the court.

The defence also informed the court of a separate application to quash the charges. Legal arguments followed, with the prosecution contending that such an application cannot be filed after a plea has already been taken. The defence responded on points of law.

Justice Abdulmalik is expected to rule on the various applications and adjourn the case for further proceedings.