Terrorism: Court reserves judgement in Owo church massacre trial

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday reserved judgement in the trial of five men accused of involvement in the 5 June 2022 attack on St Francis Catholic Church in Owo, Ondo State.

The five defendants are being prosecuted by the State Security Service (SSS) over the attack, which left dozens of worshippers dead and many others injured.

The judge, Emeka Nwite, fixed the matter for judgment after lawyers to the prosecution and the defence adopted their final written addresses and presented their closing arguments.

Judge Nwite said the judgement date would be communicated to the parties once the judgement was ready. He added that that the notice could come within 24 hours.

While presenting the final address, the prosecution lawyer, Ayodeji Adedipe, urged the court to convict the defendants and impose the maximum punishment of death because of the gravity of the alleged offence.

However, the defence lawyer, Abdullahi Mohammad, asked the court to discharge and acquit his clients, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove its case against them.

The five defendants standing for the 5 June 2022 tragic attack on St Francis Catholic Church in Owo, Ondo State, are Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza, 25; Al Qasim Idris, 20; Jamiu Abdulmalik, 26; Abdulhaleem Idris, 25; and Momoh Otuho Abubakar, 47.

The attack occurred during a Pentecost Sunday Mass at St Francis Catholic Church in Owo. Gunmen reportedly opened fire and detonated explosives inside and around the church, killing at least 41 worshippers and injuring more than 140 others. The incident triggered national outrage and condemnation from local and international bodies.

The defendants were arraigned before the Federal High Court in Abuja on 11 August 2025 on terrorism charges filed by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation. Prosecutors alleged that the suspects belonged to an Al Shabaab cell operating in Kogi State and that they planned and carried out the deadly church attack as part of a violent religious agenda. The defendants pleaded not guilty to the charges.

In September, the trial judge, Emeka Nwite, dismissed the defendants’ bail application, ruling that it lacked merit. Judge Nwite held that bail could not be granted given the gravity of the offences and the strength of the prosecution’s case. He also said there was a likelihood that the defendants could interfere with witnesses if released pending the conclusion of the trial.

After the arraignment, the SSS applied for accelerated hearing of the case, which the court granted.

The trial opened on 11 December 2025 when the prosecution called its first witness, a Catholic priest who conducted the Mass on the day of the attack. Under a court approved witness protection arrangement, many of the witnesses testified with coded identities.

During the proceedings, survivors of the attack, church members, Amotekun operatives, and SSS investigators testified before the court. Some witnesses narrated how the attackers stormed the church and opened fire on worshippers attempting to flee. Others described the aftermath of the attack and the efforts made to track down the suspects.

One of the prosecution witnesses identified two of the defendants in court as part of the attackers he saw inside the church during the assault. Another witness, who testified in a wheelchair, told the court she lost both legs and one eye after explosives detonated during the attack.

The last prosecution witness, an SSS digital forensic expert identified as SSK, told the court that investigators used phone tracking, geospatial analysis, and cell tower triangulation to trace and arrest the suspects.

The court also conducted a trial-within-trial after the defence challenged the admissibility of the defendants’ confessional statements. The defence argued that the statements were obtained under duress. However, the judge admitted the statements in evidence after ruling on the objections.

The prosecution eventually closed its case after calling 11 witnesses.

The defence later opened its case and urged the court to reject the prosecution’s evidence and acquit the defendants.