By Emmanuel Thomas l Tuesday, Sept 15, 2026
ABUJA — In a double legal victory for Nigeria’s security agencies, the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal has upheld the powers of the Nigeria Police Force to prosecute transnational criminal suspect Prince Okoro Nkemakolam, while simultaneously voiding a High Court judgment delivered against the Nigerian Army over an alleged fundamental rights violation.
The appellate court, in two separate judgments delivered by a three-man panel led by Justice Okon Abang, ruled in favor of statutory provisions curbing interlocutory delays in criminal prosecution and reinforced the constitutional guarantee to a fair hearing for public institutions.
Efforts by the Nigeria Police Force to prosecute Prince Okoro Nkemakolam over an alleged attempted homicide and brutal machete attack on a victim in Malaysia received a major boost following the Court of Appeal’s directive ordering the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to compel his arrest and immediate trial.
Nkemakolam had approached the appellate court seeking to halt his trial, contending that the attempted homicide charges instituted against him by the police were unsustainable in law.
However, Justice Abang’s panel dismissed the appeal, invoking Sections 221 and 396 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015. The provisions strictly prohibit interlocutory applications from delaying or staying proceedings in criminal matters, affirming that objections to charges must be taken alongside the main trial rather than halting prosecution.
The ruling affirms the extraterritorial reach of Nigerian criminal law and law enforcement agencies to prosecute citizens alleged to have committed violent extraterritorial crimes abroad under relevant legal frameworks.
Court Voids Judgment Against Army Over Fair Hearing Breach
In a related suit, the Court of Appeal ruled that the Federal High Court committed a procedural error by failing to afford the Nigerian Army a fair hearing during a fundamental human rights lawsuit filed by an aggrieved citizen, Abdeen Abubakar.
Abubakar had instituted the suit alleging that he was subjected to torture while held in military custody. While the lower court had initially ruled in favor of the applicant, the appellate panel observed that the trial judge entertained and determined the matter without granting the military adequate opportunity to ventilate its defence.
In a unanimous judgment, the appellate court held that the denial of fair hearing invalidated the entire lower court proceedings. Consequently, the panel set aside the trial court’s judgment and ordered the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to reassign the suit to another judge for fresh adjudication de novo.
Extraterritorial Jurisdiction and ACJA 2015
Under Nigerian law, Section 221 of the ACJA 2015 prohibits courts from entertaining objections to charges that would lead to a stay of proceedings, while Section 396 mandates day-to-day trial conduct to prevent high-profile criminal defendants from frustrating justice through endless interlocutory appeals. The ruling reinforces Nigeria’s bilateral law enforcement obligations, establishing that suspects cannot hide behind technicalities to evade prosecution for offenses allegedly committed overseas.
The Principle of Fair Hearing (Section 36, 1999 Constitution)
The appellate court’s decision regarding the Nigerian Army hinges on Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), which guarantees all entities—including institutional state actors—the right to present their defence before an impartial tribunal. Nigerian appellate courts routinely void trial proceedings where a lower court determines liability or fundamental rights breaches without hearing the defense of security agencies.
