The arraignment of two associates of Yoruba Nation agitator, Sunday Adeyemo, aka Sunday Igboho was on Monday stalled at the Federal High Court, Abuja following the absence of an interpreter.

The associates are Jamiu Oyetunji and Amudat Babatunde. 

The Department of State Services (DSS) had on August 31, 2021, filed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CR/305/2021, bordering on terrorism charges against the agitators.

At the resumed hearing of the case on Monday, the defence counsel Pelumi Olajengbesi argued that the DSS does not have the capacity in law to file terrorism charges against the defendants. 

He added that only the Attorney General of the Federation has the power to carry out the process.

He also argued that there was a need for a competent interpreter because his clients could not speak or understand English. 

He said a Yoruba interpreter was needed to enable them to listen and understand the charges preferred against them.

The trial judge, Justice Obiorah Egwuatu, therefore, adjourned the matter to January 22, 2022.

The DSS had alleged that the 1st defendant, Oyetunji, was in possession of firearms for terrorism-related activities, while Amudat allegedly helped to promote acts of terrorism, using her Facebook page.

“That you Oyetunji, Babatunde, with others still at large, on or about the July 1, did conspire to commit acts of terrorism.

“Oyetunji, Babatunde and others at large committed the acts at the residence of one Sunday Adeyemo (aka Sunday Igboho) at Soka area of Ibadan, Oyo State.

"They were in possession of prohibited firearms: contrary to Section 17 of Terrorism (Prevention) (Amendment) Act, 2013 and punishable under the same Act.

“They were in possession, without lawful authority, the under listed prohibited firearms: five AK 47 rifles with serial numbers 04956, 213740, two AK 47 rifles whose serial numbers could not be identified, two pump action rifles with serial numbers 8836 9398 respectively.

“Others are one pump action which serial number could not be identified and one stun gun.’’

“This is contrary to Section 1(3)(c)(v) of the Terrorism Prevention Act CAP 10, 2011 and punishable under Section 1(2) of the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act 2013.”

You may also like

Read Next

For comments view this content on the regular site.