Court-Martial President Warns Lawyers Not to Weaponise Protest Rights

The President of the General Court-Martial trying 36 Nigerian military personnel for an alleged plot to overthrow President Bola Tinubu’s administration has warned defence lawyers against what he termed “weaponising” the right to protest. Air Vice Marshal H. I. Alhaji delivered the admonition during proceedings, according to reports from SaharaReporters, urging restraint and Diplomacy in interactions between the defence team and the court.

Alhaji expressed disapproval of the conduct of certain legal representatives, stating he could not envision a Senior Advocate of Nigeria or a senior military officer participating in public demonstrations. “And I urge you not to weaponize the right to protest. Please. I cannot imagine seeing a senior advocate of Nigeria protesting,” he said. “I am sure we all have a very hard experience. So I cannot imagine a general officer protesting. It is not exciting.” The court president emphasised the need for civility, noting that heated exchanges could hurt feelings. “We should also be a little bit diplomatic in the way we talk. Okay? So we should also find a nice way of talking. We are all human beings. Sometimes our feelings get hurt. We should find this middle ground. The way we talk to each other.”

The remarks came amid heightened scrutiny of the trial, which involves accusations of a coup attempt against the Tinubu government. The accused personnel face serious charges, and their defence team has challenged aspects of their detention conditions. During the same session, a lawyer representing the defendants appealed to the court to restore family visitation rights. The counsel acknowledged the gravity of the allegations but argued that continued denial of family access compounds the psychological strain on the detainees.

“I also appeal to this honourable court to re-address the issue of the family of the accused persons,” the lawyer told the court. “Yes, I know they are facing serious charges. And also, being denied access to members of their family constitutes another psychological turmoil on them.” The lawyer noted that while the government has provided for the accused’s basic needs in detention, family contact offers essential emotional support. “If the court would reconsider granting the family access, at least they are not with their family… but for them to have access to members of their family, that is just a plea I want to make so that whenever they are going to see their family members in good Health and also that they are sympathizing with their situation, their condition, but also to give a great effort also on their spirits for them to be able to continue to stand their hearing.”

The lawyer contended that regular visits could sustain morale and help the accused endure the prolonged proceedings. “So I appeal also to the honourable court to consider the issue of granting the family members access to see their beloved ones. That is the appeal I want to make to the honourable court.”

The exchange underscores two distinct tensions in the high-profile case: the court’s demand for professional decorum from legal officers and the defence’s push for humane treatment of the detained personnel. The trial remains one of the most closely watched military proceedings in Nigeria in recent years, with implications for military justice and civil-military relations under the current administration.