The Nigerian Army has again postponed the ruling of the General Court Martial (GCM) hearing the alleged coup plot case involving some military officers accused of attempting to overthrow President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration.

The ruling, which had earlier been scheduled for Wednesday, September 30, 2026, has now been moved to Monday, October 5, 2026.

In a notice issued to members of the court and other concerned parties, the Army said the GCM sitting earlier adjourned to Wednesday had been postponed.

“The GCM sitting earlier adjourned to Wednesday, 30 September, 2026, has now been postponed to Monday, 5 October 2026,” the notice stated.

The new sitting is scheduled to commence at 10am at the Scorpion Officers’ Mess, Asokoro, Abuja.

The notice was signed by Major MU Ardo, identified as the Liaison Officer.

The latest postponement marks the fourth time the ruling has been deferred, further delaying the conclusion of the military trial involving the soldiers accused in connection with the alleged coup plot against President Tinubu.

The Army did not disclose the reason for the latest postponement in the notice.

The notice simply stated: “Any inconvenience caused is highly regretted.”

The GCM trying Nigerian military officers accused of plotting to overthrow President Tinubu is set to deliver its ruling on the admissibility of statements allegedly obtained from the accused officers amid allegations that officials of the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) coerced some of them into making or reproducing false statements.

The ruling is scheduled for Wednesday, September 30, 2026, following a trial-within-a-trial conducted by the court to determine whether the statements made by the accused officers were obtained voluntarily and whether they can be admitted as evidence in the ongoing proceedings.

The General Court Martial is presided over by Air Vice Marshal H. I. Alhaji (NAF/2211).

The proceedings are being held at the Scorpion Officers’ Mess in Asokoro, Abuja.

The trial-within-a-trial was conducted over several weeks after defence lawyers objected to the admission of statements tendered by the prosecution.

The defence argued that the statements did not meet the legal requirements for admissibility, alleging, among other things, that lawyers or witnesses chosen by the accused officers were not present when the statements were taken.

The defence further argued that video recordings were not made to show the accused officers writing their statements in the presence of their chosen witnesses, as required under relevant provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.

The lawyers also challenged the circumstances under which the statements were obtained, arguing that some of the accused officers were not properly cautioned or adequately informed of their rights before they made the statements.

During the trial-within-a-trial, the prosecution presented evidence aimed at establishing that the statements were made voluntarily and without improper pressure.

However, some of the accused officers gave evidence disputing this account and stating that they were subjected to coercion, intimidation, inducement and physical abuse by officials of the DIA.

According to testimony presented during the proceedings, some of the officers stated that they were led to believe that making particular statements would secure their release from detention.

The officers further explained that statements had already been prepared by intelligence officials and that they were subsequently compelled to reproduce or sign the documents, despite having no knowledge of some of the matters contained in them.

Some of the accused officers also told the court that they did not personally originate or write the statements attributed to them.

They said that they were forced to copy pre-written statements which contained allegations or admissions they claimed were false or unrelated to their knowledge.

The allegations included claims of various forms of intimidation and physical abuse during the period in which the statements were allegedly obtained.