Tukur Mamu challenges AGF’s ‘terrorist’ label in fundamental rights suit

Tukur Mamu challenges AGF’s ‘terrorist’ label in fundamental rights suit

Abuja – Alleged terrorist negotiator Tukur Mamu has filed a fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), challenging his designation as a “terrorist” while still standing trial.

Mamu’s lead counsel, Johnson Usman, SAN, told Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja that the AGF’s action violated Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution, which presumes a defendant innocent until proven guilty. The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/713/2024, lists the AGF as the sole respondent.

Usman argued that media publications and official statements designating Mamu as a terrorist were unlawful, attaching printouts as exhibits to their application. He insisted that only the court, upon conviction, has the power to designate a person a terrorist and that the AGF’s unilateral action infringed on his client’s constitutional rights.

READ ALSO:

• Afenifere urges Tinubu to seek help as middle-belt insecurity threatens Nigeria
• Monday Sit-at-Home Persists in South-East Despite Improved Security
• Dangote partners Honeywell to double refinery capacity to 1.4m bpd by 2028

“It is legally, morally, and religiously wrong to designate Mamu a terrorist while he is undergoing trial,” Usman said. “The court alone has the authority to make such a determination, and the applicant is entitled to damages to teach that lesson.”

The AGF, represented by David Kaswe, countered that the designation was lawful under Sections 49 and 50 of the Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act, 2022, which empowers a Sanction Committee to recommend individuals suspected of terrorism for designation. Kaswe maintained that the AGF acted within the law, and the committee regularly reviews designations.

Justice Umar pressed Kaswe on whether it is lawful to label a defendant a terrorist before the conclusion of their trial. Kaswe responded that the applicant remains a “designated terrorist” and not a convicted terrorist; only a court conviction would confirm such a status.

Usman, however, argued that the reliance on Section 49 of the Terrorism Prevention Act conflicts with Section 36 of the Constitution. He contended that the designation, made after Mamu was charged in 2023, violates his presumption of innocence.

The judge adjourned the matter until February 23, 2026, for the adoption of final written addresses on the interplay between Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution and Section 49 of the Terrorism Prevention Act.

Tukur Mamu challenges AGF’s ‘terrorist’ label in fundamental rights suit