Connect with us

News

Sylva, five others arraigned, officers’ wives seek justice over alleged coup plot

Published

on

The Federal Government will on Wednesday (today) arraign six individuals, including two retired senior military officers and a serving police inspector, before the Federal High Court in Abuja over an alleged coup plot to wage war against Nigeria and overthrow the President.

The defendants — retired Major General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana, retired Naval Captain Erasmus Ochegobia Victor, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni and Abdulkadir Sani — are billed to appear before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik.

Also named in the charge but said to be at large is former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

The defendants are facing 13 counts bordering on conspiracy, attempt to commit treason, terrorism, failure to disclose security intelligence, financing terrorism and money laundering.

The charge, filed on Monday by the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and signed by the Director of Public Prosecutions, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN), accused them of offences ranging from alleged attempts to overthrow the government to terrorism-related financing.

According to the prosecution, the defendants allegedly conspired in 2025 “to levy war against the state to overpower the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

They are also accused of failing to report alleged knowledge of a planned treasonable act involving one Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Ma’aji and others.

The government further alleged that the defendants “knowing that a treasonable act was intended to be committed, did not give information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President… or a Peace Officer.”

They were also accused of failing to prevent the alleged offence, stating that they “did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence.”

Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim and Zekeri Umoru were also accused of attending meetings allegedly linked to the plot “in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilise the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

The charge further alleged that the defendants “knowingly and indirectly, rendered support” for acts of terrorism and also failed to disclose critical intelligence to security agencies.

Abdulkadir Sani was accused of receiving N2m on September 23, 2025, while Bukar Kashim Goni allegedly retained N50m from accounts linked to A & A Express Link Concept.

Zekeri Umoru was also accused of receiving N10m cash from Colonel Ma’aji and retaining N8.8m in his account, while Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim allegedly received N1m from the same source.

The offences, according to the charge, contravene Sections 37(2), 40(b), 26(1), 2(3)(d), 12(a), 13(1)(a), and 16(1)(a)(b) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, as well as provisions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

Alleged coup probe

The development comes amid widening investigations into an alleged coup plot that has already led to arrests within the military and security circles.

In October 2025, the Federal Government cancelled the Independence Day parade, a move later linked in reports to the alleged plot.

The Defence Headquarters, however, dismissed any connection.

Weeks later, authorities confirmed the arrest of 16 military officers, while two others were declared wanted.

In January 2026, the Defence Headquarters confirmed that an internal investigation had established a plan to overthrow President Bola Tinubu, adding that suspects would face military disciplinary panels.

Families of detained officers have since staged protests and demanded transparency, access to their relatives, and speedy trial.

Court martial

Meanwhile, The PUNCH gathered that the military has set up a court martial to try serving personnel allegedly implicated in the case.

The serving military personnel reportedly detained are Brig Gen M. A. Sadiq, Col M. A. Maaji, Lt Col S. Bappah, Lt Col A. A. Hayatu, Lt Col P. Dangnap, Lt Col M. Almakura, Maj A. J. Ibrahim, Maj M. M. Jiddah, Maj M. A. Usman, Maj D. Yusuf, Capt I. Bello, Capt A. A. Yusuf, Lt S. S. Felix, Lt Cdr D. B. Abdullahi, Sqn Ldr S. B. Adamu and Maj I. Dauda.

Reliable sources confirmed that the panel will be constituted today to begin proceedings.

It was also gathered that detained officers have, for the first time since their arrest, been granted access to their lawyers.

Wives demand clarity, fairness

One of the campaigners for the detained officers’ families, Nana Usman, said there was confusion over who was being arraigned in court and who would face military trial.

Nana is wife to one of the detained senior officers, Lt. Col Sadiq Mohammed.

She said, “Our husbands are not among those being taken to the Federal High Court tomorrow (today). Those are retired military men and top police officers from what we heard.

See also  Governors demand greater powers for state police

“We heard our spouses will face a court-martial from tomorrow (today). I may not be able to say much until we see how proceedings go. That’s also partly because there is no official communication from the military.

“We were only to bring their lawyers to see them today (Tuesday) and prepare ahead for the trial. But whatever it is, we just hope the judgment will be fair. I am also surprised to see them grant the lawyers access to finally see them seven months after their arrest.

“Remember when we (serving officers wives) granted an interview with The PUNCH, we told you specifically that members of their families and the lawyers were denied access to see them.

“Although allowing them access to their lawyers is a good development, we are just hoping they will be fair in their judgment.”

Wives and relatives of detained officers have continued protests, demanding fair trial and access to their loved ones, insisting that they have been held without clear communication for months.

They maintain that their demand is for justice and transparency, not interference in judicial processes.

Recently, children of some of the detained officers staged a peaceful protest at the National Assembly, calling for a speedy trial and the release of their fathers. The young demonstrators held placards with inscriptions such as “Don’t Kill Our Daddies,” “Detention Without Trial is Injustice,” and “Six Months of Torture: Enough Is Enough.”

“I find this whole coup allegation very surprising. I still don’t believe that my husband can be explained into even doing what he is being accused of. He’s someone who really holds his family values very dearly. He does not want anything that would dent his reputation or his family values,” Lt Col M. A. Al-Makura’s wife Shafa’atu Ali Agbo, said.

Possible death penalty – SANs

Senior lawyers have weighed in on the possible consequences facing the defendants if convicted.

Mike Ahamba (SAN) said treason-related offences attracted the most severe punishments under the Nigerian law.

“Every treasonable trial case could carry a death sentence or life imprisonment or long term imprisonment, depending on the facts of this case. If it’s treason, it’s a very serious offense in any country, and that’s exactly what they are facing.

“It depends on what they are charged with and what evidence they have against them. Those who heard and did not report may not get the same sentence as those who participated in planning the coup. They are all offenses.

So let us listen to the evidence they have against them, that’s what’s important,” he stated.

Bankole Akomolafe (SAN) also shared his view.

“It is a death sentence (if found guilty) even though the judge may exercise his power to commute it to a life sentence. But generally, treason attracts death sentence,” he said.

He explained that the judge may decide to issue a lesser sentence on defendants who only committed borderline offenses, adding however that under the criminal code, the death sentence had not been abrogated for those with more severe offenses.

“If you look at our criminal code since they are going to try them at the Federal High Court, if anybody is able to prove that his own is a borderline, not fully involved, the judge may apply discretion to give them lesser sentence – long term imprisonment like 20, 15, 10 years and so on.

“But those that will be found directly culpable and all that, it doesn’t matter that they are under a civilian regime, death sentence has not been abrogated from our law, even though the Judges are skeptical and the state governors too. But it is still part of our law. The maximum sentence is death,” Akomolafe stated.

Other senior lawyers, including Sam Erugo (SAN), Olu Daramola (SAN) and Aare Isiaka Olagunju (SAN), also said the accused could face death penalty if convicted of treason, though appellate rights remain intact.

Erugo stressed that conviction would depend on whether treason or a lesser offence is proven, while Daramola noted that punishment would vary based on established charges.

Olagunju added that treason remains a capital offence under Nigerian law.

“If they are found guilty, they will be sentenced to death if the charge is treason. That is the oldest provision in our criminal law, dating back to the pre-independence era and retained in the Criminal Code Act,” he said.

According to him, defendants in such serious criminal cases retain the right of appeal up to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, which must be exhausted before any sentence can be carried out.

See also  Tinubu reinstates Fubara after Emergency Rule

“It will not be like a military process. This is a regular court. They will go through the Court of Appeal and up to the Supreme Court,” he said.

He added that the determination of punishment ultimately depends on the exact legal charge proven in court, particularly whether the prosecution secures a conviction for treason rather than a lesser related offence.

Similarly, Olu Daramola, SAN, said that the fate of individuals accused of plotting to overthrow the government will depend on the specific offence established against them under Nigerian law.

Speaking in a telephone interview ahead of the suspects’ planned arraignment, Daramola explained that while treason-related offences are treated with utmost seriousness, the applicable punishment varies depending on the nature of the charge.

“They are going to be arraigned tomorrow. If the prosecution succeeds and they are convicted, whether they will be sentenced to death or life imprisonment depends on the offence proved,” he said.

“The kind of treason where people are plotting to overthrow the government can actually attract a death sentence,” he added.

However, the senior lawyer expressed uncertainty over whether the current legal framework differs significantly from the military-era decrees under which past coup plotters were tried.

Also the Chairman of Egbe Amofin Oodua, Aare Isiaka Olagunju (SAN), said that if the defendants are found guilty of plotting a coup in Nigeria they may face the death penalty, in line with existing criminal laws.

Olagunju, said the law is clear on the punishment for treason, noting that where the prosecution successfully proves such a charge, the court is empowered to impose the maximum penalty.

“The law provides for death sentence in cases of treason. Where such an offence is established before the court, the punishment is clearly spelt out,” he said.

The senior lawyer further noted that while the law prescribes strict penalties, any accused person would still be entitled to a fair hearing and the full benefit of the judicial process.

CHARGES AGAINST DEFENDANTS

COUNT 1

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA (still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired with one another to levy war against the state to overawe the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 37(2) of the Criminal Code Cap C38 LFN 2004.

COUNT 2

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM ONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this hourable Court, knowing that COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/10668) and others intended to commit treason, did not give he information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, or a Peace Officer and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 40(b) of the Criminal Code Cap C38 LFN 2004.

COUNT 3

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, knowing that COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA‘AJI (N/10668), and others intended to commit treason, did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 40(b) of the Criminal Code Cap C 38 (LFN) 2004.

COUNT 4

“That you MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large) and others, sometime in the year 2025 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired with one another to commit an act of terrorism in the Federal Republic of Nigeria and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 26(1) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 5

“That you, INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373) AND ZEKERI UMORU, sometime in the year 2025 in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilize the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, knowingly participated in meetings connected with an act of terrorism and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Sections 2(3)(d) and 12(a) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

See also  Sowore cannot rely on statements I withdrew — Omokri 

COUNT 6

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, AND TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large), sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court knowingly and indirectly, rendered support to COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA‘AJI (N/10668) and others, to commit an act of terrorism, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 13(1) (a) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 7

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, AND TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large), sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court had information which you knew would be of material assistance in pventing the commission of the act of terrorism by COLONEL OHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/10668), and others, failed to lose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 6(1)(a) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 8

“That you, MAJOR GENERAL MOHAMMED IBRAHIM GANA -(RTD), CAPTAIN (NN) ERASMUS OCHEGOBIA VICTOR -(RTD), INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM(AP 776373), ZEKERI UMORU, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, ABDULKADIR SANI, AND TIMPRE SYLVA(still at large), sometime in the year 2025, in Abuja within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court had information which you knew would be of material assistance to securing the apprehension of COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/10668), and others for an offence of terrorism, failed to disclose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 16(1){b) of the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

COUNT 9

“That you, ABDULKADIR SANI, on or about the 23% day of September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, indirectly retained the sum of N2,000,000.00(Two Million Naira) only in your Jaiz Bank Account Number 0005620270 from A & A Express Link Concept, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

COUNT 10

“That you, BUKAR KASHIM GONI, in September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N50,000,000.00( Fifty Million Naira) only in your First Bank Account Number 3021511166 from A & A Express Link Concept, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

COUNT 11

“That you, ZEKERI UMORU, in September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, without going through a financial institution accepted a cash payment of the sum of N10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) only from Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Maa‘aji and thereby committed an offence contrary to Sections 2(1)(a) and 19(1)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 19(2)(b) of the same Act.

COUNT 12

“That you, ZEKERI UMORU, in September,2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N8,800,000.00(Eight Million, Eight Hundred Thousand Naira) only in your Zenith Bank Plc Account Number 2006041878, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

COUNT 13

“That you, INSPECTOR AHMED IBRAHIM, in September, 2025, in Abuja, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, directly took possession of the sum of N1,000,000.00(One Million Naira) only from COLONEL MOHAMMED ALHASSAN MA’AJI (N/ 10668), which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act to wit: terrorism financing, and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section | (2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act,2022 and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the same Act.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

SEE FULL LIST: NJC recommends 28 candidates for judicial appointments

Published

on

The National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended 28 candidates for appointment as judicial officers across six states, including 24 candidates for various State High Courts.

The recommendations cover the High Courts of Kano, Ebonyi, Edo, Adamawa and Ogun states, the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal and Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The Council announced the recommendations in a statement issued on Wednesday by its Deputy Director of Information, Kemi Babalola-Ogedengbe.

It said the decisions were taken at its 112th meeting held on November 3, 2026, under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun.

According to the Council, one candidate was recommended as Grand Kadi of the Plateau State Sharia Court of Appeal, while another was recommended as Kadi of the Adamawa State Sharia Court of Appeal.

Two others were recommended as judges of the Adamawa State Customary Court of Appeal.

The appointment includes “24 High Court candidates and four candidates for the Sharia and Customary Courts of Appeal.”

The full list of the 28 recommended candidates is as follows:

PLATEAU STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (GRAND KADI)

1. Tijjani Jibrin Zololo

KANO STATE HIGH COURT

2. Nafisah Yusuf Hassan
3. Halima Yahuza Ahmad
4. Abdullahi Abdulsalam Bature
5. Musa Ibrahim Umar

EBONYI STATE HIGH COURT

6. Dickson Edmund Amaga

EDO STATE HIGH COURT

7. Benson Osagie Osawaru
8. Taiye Osayanmon Omoruyi
9. Dorothy Ibhade Adamaigbo
10. Festus Osagie Usiobaifo
11. Pius Idemudia Oiwoh
12. Majebi Samuel Amune
13. Emike Jessica Imuekemhe

See also  Tinubu reinstates Fubara after Emergency Rule

ADAMAWA STATE HIGH COURT

14. Aminu Sa’ad
15. Ibrahim Ulenda Musa
16. Sadiq Giwa
17. Musa Bala Mijinyawa
18. Japhet Ibrahim
19. Aliyu Bakari
20. Yakubu Ahmadu

OGUN STATE HIGH COURT

21. Olakulehin Luqman Abiola Oke
22. Adebimpe Folusho Obienu
23. Fatimat Adeola Daudu
24. Rafiat Bolanle Kadiri
25. Oludotun Olaniyi Osho

ADAMAWA STATE SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL (KADI)

26. Abubakar Ishaku

ADAMAWA STATE CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL

27. Elshama Gwama Dimas
28. David Benjamin Pembi

The NJC said all the recommended candidates were expected to be sworn in by their respective state governors without delay.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

JD Vance reveals Iran war cost Republicans midterm elections, read details

Published

on

United States Vice President JD Vance has blamed the Iran war for the Republican Party’s poor performance in the 2026 midterm elections, saying many supporters of President Donald Trump switched allegiance to Democrats over dissatisfaction with the conflict.

Vance said this in a post on his X handle on Wednesday, arguing that the party’s defeat was not primarily caused by poor voter turnout but by the defection of voters who supported the Trump-Vance ticket in 2024.

He said data analysis conducted by his team before the elections had shown that Republican supporters were turning out in significant numbers, despite opinion polls predicting a major Democratic victory.

“One of the things the data analysts on our side obsessed over was ‘composition’—whether the electorate looked close enough to 2024 for Republicans to win,” he said.

Vance explained that although turnout was encouraging in several states, a member of his data team had warned him that many Republican voters were angry and might not vote for the party.

“Well, that looks prophetic now. Our voters did show up. In Florida, for example, the electorate was nine points more Republican than Democrat, just a couple points worse than 2024,” he said.

“But the main problem is not turnout. The main problem is that many people who voted for Trump/Vance in 2024 voted for Democrats in 2026.”

The Vice President acknowledged that the party might have failed to communicate its economic policies effectively, particularly on the cost of living and inflation.

However, he said the major reasons voters abandoned the Republicans were concerns about the war, economic hardship, America’s foreign policy priorities and its relationship with Israel.

See also  Nigeria, EU seek legal pathways for Nigerians to Europe, read details

According to Vance, a pollster who accurately predicted the election outcome identified four major demands among former Republican supporters who switched to the Democrats.

The demands were to end the war, prioritise the cost of living and inflation, put America first and change the country’s relationship with Israel.

“The reason we lost is the war. The president himself said so last night,” Vance stated.

He also defended television personality Rachel Campos-Duffy, saying her earlier call for a diplomatic resolution to the conflict had proved politically sound.

Vance warned against attempts by Republican establishment figures to attribute the party’s electoral setback to other issues, particularly immigration policy.

He said he was open to reviewing immigration enforcement strategies, including targeting businesses that employ undocumented workers, but rejected calls for amnesty.

“Anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you,” he said.

The Vice President challenged those who believed the war was worth the political cost to defend that position openly, noting that the defeat could cost Republicans control of the Senate for the next six years.

“If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next six years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay,” he said.

“Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest.”

Despite the setback, Vance expressed optimism about the country’s future, urging disappointed Republican supporters to channel their anger into rebuilding the party and electing candidates who share their political views.

“Let’s take that anger and get back to the work of saving our country,” he added.

See also  Tinubu reinstates Fubara after Emergency Rule

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

UK to strengthen immigration enforcement with facial recognition

Published

on

The United Kingdom government plans to expand live facial recognition technology to strengthen immigration enforcement and identify individuals who have violated immigration rules.

The initiative, being developed by the Home Office, could see facial recognition cameras deployed at transport hubs and public events to help immigration officers identify people who have overstayed their visas, entered the country unlawfully or breached their immigration conditions.

According to policy documents published in October and sighted by PUNCH Online on Thursday, the proposed expansion could extend the technology’s use to general immigration enforcement, including civil immigration violations that do not necessarily involve criminal offences.

The development comes as Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood seeks to intensify immigration enforcement through increased funding, additional personnel and expanded deportation operations.

The Home Office said the technology would help officers identify individuals subject to removal proceedings and those attempting to re-enter the UK unlawfully.

The policy documents also suggest that facial recognition could reduce the need for repeated enforcement visits to residential properties and workplaces.

Authorities have already conducted three trials of the technology at Holyhead port in north Wales between November 2025 and February 2026. The trials focused on identifying individuals travelling from Ireland who were subject to deportation orders or wanted over immigration-related criminal offences.

The programme has now entered its formal delivery phase, with officials considering wider deployments at transport hubs and large public gatherings.

A Home Office spokesperson confirmed that further trials were being considered while the government examined the potential benefits and implications of the technology.

See also  200 soldiers from Nigeria, other countries arrive Benin for cleanup after failed coup

U K Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, said: “Facial recognition technology has been the biggest breakthrough for catching criminals since DNA matching, already helping police take thousands of dangerous criminals off our streets.

“The benefits are clear, but we must ensure that its use is fair, safe and proportionate.

“It is right we put in place clear laws to ensure that the use of this technology is watertight, so the public can have confidence that these tools, which are vital to our safety, are used responsibly too.”

However, the proposed expansion has raised concerns among civil liberties organisations and migrant rights advocates over privacy, surveillance and the possibility of inaccurate identification.

The Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants described the development as a significant escalation of immigration enforcement powers, while the Open Rights Group questioned the transparency of the plans, public consent and the absence of comprehensive legislation governing facial recognition.

Critics have also warned that the technology could disproportionately affect people of colour because of concerns about identification accuracy.

Meanwhile, Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner William Webster has questioned whether existing regulatory arrangements are sufficient to oversee the expanding use of facial recognition across government agencies.

Under the proposed policy, individuals under 18 will not be included on facial recognition watchlists.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

WHATSAPP CHANNEL

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending