Fresh court records have provided a detailed account of how investigators say a group of military officers and civilians allegedly discussed, developed and later revived a plan to overthrow President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration.
The records, which form part of a wider investigation, contain bank records, hotel receipts, electronic communications, interrogation materials and other evidence presented in connection with the alleged plot.
At the centre of one part of the investigation is Colonel Mohammed Ma’aji, whom military investigators have identified as a key figure in the alleged conspiracy.
According to a statement attributed to Ma’aji in the investigative records, discussions about military intervention began in 2023, before the end of former President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration. The alleged plan was later suspended because of problems involving money, logistics and manpower.
Investigators say the project was subsequently revived after Ma’aji failed in a second attempt to secure promotion to brigadier general in 2024.
The alleged operation eventually came under security scrutiny in 2025.
However, an important point must be made at the outset: the allegations have not been finally established by the courts. Ma’aji and the other defendants have denied wrongdoing, and the legal proceedings are continuing.
How Did the Alleged Coup Plan Begin?
According to Ma’aji’s statement contained in the investigative records, discussions about military intervention began around 2023.
He told investigators that insecurity, corruption, economic hardship and concerns about governance contributed to dissatisfaction among some officers.
The statement described the individuals involved as people who believed they were motivated by patriotism and a desire for political change.
But the alleged plan did not immediately become an operational conspiracy.
According to Ma’aji, the group struggled to obtain enough funding, manpower and logistical support.
Those difficulties eventually caused the project to be put on hold.
How Was the Alleged Operation Funded?
The financial aspect of the investigation is one of the areas receiving significant attention.
Ma’aji told investigators that he personally provided a substantial amount of money during the early stages.
According to his statement, some of his contributions came from the sale of personal property.
He claimed that he sold three houses in Kaduna State and a student hostel at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, to provide funds for activities associated with the group.
He also referred to contributions from other individuals.
One Army major allegedly contributed ₦1 million, while another officer was said to have provided foreign currency on several occasions.
These claims form part of Ma’aji’s account of the alleged operation and are not, by themselves, a judicial finding that the transactions occurred as alleged.
Why Was the Alleged Plan Suspended?
The alleged movement reportedly struggled to acquire enough resources to move beyond discussions.
According to Ma’aji, the group needed additional funding, officers, soldiers and other forms of manpower.
Without those resources, the proposed operation could not move into its execution phase.
The alleged plan therefore remained largely at the level of discussions and preparations.
Ma’aji said there was no “D-Day” and that the group was waiting for additional resources and personnel.
This is significant because it suggests, according to his account, that the alleged operation never reached the point at which the proposed takeover was actually carried out.
Why Was the Alleged Plan Revived?
The investigation records indicate that the group later returned to the idea.
One important development was Ma’aji’s failure to secure promotion to brigadier general for a second time in 2024.
According to his statement, some members of the group subsequently began contacting him and encouraging him to revive the movement.
However, Ma’aji rejected the idea that the failed promotion was the main reason for the alleged plot.
Instead, he cited several political and economic grievances.
These included:
- fuel subsidy removal;
- naira reforms and floating;
- taxation;
- electricity tariff increases;
- corruption;
- insecurity;
- unemployment;
- and the government’s handling of protests.
He also referred to the #EndSARS and #EndBadGovernance protests as examples of the frustrations affecting Nigerians.
The significance of this part of the statement is that Ma’aji presented the alleged movement as being driven by broader political and economic grievances rather than simply his personal career disappointment.
Who Was Allegedly Involved in Reviving the Plan?
According to Ma’aji’s account, Lieutenant Colonel Shamsuddeen Bappah was among those who pushed for the alleged plan to be revived.
The statement said Bappah travelled from Ibadan to Abuja to persuade Ma’aji to continue with the project.
He reportedly offered to sell a plot of land in Bauchi to raise money for the operation, although the property was not sold according to the records.
The group subsequently held meetings at different locations in Abuja.
Ma’aji identified Brookville Hotel and Greenland Hotel in Lokogoma as locations where some of the meetings allegedly took place.
The meetings reportedly occurred towards the end of 2024 or early 2025.
New people were allegedly introduced as the group attempted to expand its network.
What Was the Group Allegedly Trying to Achieve?
This is where the allegations become considerably more serious.
According to Ma’aji’s statement, the alleged plan involved obtaining enough manpower to take control of key locations and place senior officials under arrest.
He said the plan was supposed to be carried out at night.
The statement also referred to efforts to obtain information about senior military officials and their locations.
According to the prosecution’s separate allegations, the plotters intended to seize the Presidential Villa and capture or eliminate senior political figures.
Those named in the prosecution’s allegations include President Bola Tinubu, Vice President Kashim Shettima, Senate President Godswill Akpabio and House of Representatives Speaker Tajudeen Abbas.
These are prosecution allegations, not established facts.
The courts will determine whether the evidence presented is sufficient to prove those claims.
Why Were Service Chiefs Allegedly Targeted?
According to Ma’aji’s statement, part of the alleged plan involved placing the service chiefs under arrest.
He said individuals were expected to obtain information and photographs that could assist with identifying their locations.
The stated purpose, according to the account, was to place the service chiefs under arrest rather than interfere with their movement.
The alleged operation was to take place at night.
Again, the records indicate that the plan never reached the stage of execution.
Was There an Attempt to Gain Access to the Presidential Villa?
The investigative records contain allegations that the group sought people who could provide access or logistical assistance around the Presidential Villa.
Ma’aji said Zekeri Umoru, an electrician working at the Villa, was introduced through Police Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim.
According to his statement, Umoru allegedly requested ₦1 billion to assist with obtaining access to the Villa.
Ma’aji said he rejected the demand, arguing that the alleged movement was motivated by patriotism rather than money.
The records also describe other efforts to obtain manpower.
However, the alleged network was not fully established.
Were Civilian Groups Allegedly Considered for Manpower?
Yes.
Ma’aji’s statement referred to a proposal to use members of the Civilian Joint Task Force in the North-East.
According to the account, Major Iliyasu suggested using CJTF members as manpower and claimed that the group had access to weapons.
However, Ma’aji said the proposed team had not been fully formed.
More meetings were reportedly required, and the group was still waiting for additional resources and military personnel.
This is another indication that, according to the investigative material, the alleged plan remained incomplete.
What Evidence Did Investigators Say They Found?
Investigators have presented several categories of evidence in the wider case.
These include:
- bank records;
- hotel receipts;
- electronic communications;
- interrogation materials;
- documentary evidence;
- and a notebook reportedly recovered from Ma’aji’s residence.
A prosecution witness told the Federal High Court that the notebook contained alleged operational plans, names and designations of senior officials and proposed political and structural changes following the alleged coup.
The prosecution has also presented evidence it says establishes financial connections between some of the defendants.
But evidence presented by prosecutors still has to be tested through the legal process.
The existence of a document, transaction or statement does not automatically establish the prosecution’s entire case.
What Role Did Money Play in the Investigation?
Money has become one of the major issues in the court proceedings.
A military police officer who testified before the Federal High Court said investigators identified financial links between Ma’aji, former Bayelsa State governor Timipre Sylva and some of the other defendants.
The witness also alleged that Purple Waves Limited was used as a channel for moving funds connected with the suspected operation.
Investigators reportedly identified several transactions between September 19 and October 2, 2025 involving hundreds of millions of naira.
The Federal Government’s 13-count charge against six defendants also includes allegations involving terrorism financing and money laundering.
However, these remain allegations being tested in court.
What Was Alleged About Timipre Sylva?
Ma’aji’s statement reportedly claimed that former Bayelsa State governor Timipre Sylva contributed about ₦400 million to the alleged movement.
Sylva has denied involvement.
His spokesperson described him as a committed democrat and rejected the allegation that he participated in planning or financing a coup.
This distinction is important.
Being named in an investigative statement or accused by another person does not establish criminal responsibility.
Sylva’s alleged role will have to be determined through the relevant legal proceedings and evidence.
How Was the Alleged Plot Discovered?
The alleged plan came under security scrutiny in September 2025.
According to evidence presented in court, an intelligence report concerning Ma’aji and others was received by the then Chief of Army Staff, Olufemi Oluyede.
A prosecution witness told the court that the report was assessed and considered credible before investigators were directed to act.
Investigators subsequently searched Ma’aji’s residence.
According to the witness, they recovered a notebook containing what they described as operational plans, names of senior officials and information concerning individuals allegedly expected to participate in attacks.
Investigators also reportedly obtained electronic and documentary material that they said linked Ma’aji to other suspects.
Why Did the Military Initially Describe the Investigation as Routine?
When reports first emerged that military officers were being detained in October 2025, the Defence Headquarters initially described the process as a routine internal investigation.
The military said the investigation was aimed at maintaining discipline and professionalism.
As more information emerged, however, the authorities acknowledged that an alleged coup plot was being investigated.
The military subsequently indicated that anyone found culpable would face appropriate judicial proceedings.
This change in public messaging contributed to increased attention around the case.
How Many People Are Facing Trial?
The case has developed along two separate legal tracks.
Serving military officers, including Ma’aji, are facing proceedings before a General Court Martial.
Six retired military personnel and civilians are being tried separately before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The Federal Government filed 13 counts against the six defendants.
The charges include allegations relating to treason, terrorism, failure to disclose information about an alleged coup and money laundering.
The defendants have pleaded not guilty.
Why Are There Two Different Court Proceedings?
The distinction largely reflects the status of the defendants.
Serving military personnel can face proceedings before a military court, while civilians and retired personnel may face criminal proceedings before the regular courts.
This means the same wider investigation can produce different legal proceedings involving different defendants.
The evidence and allegations in each case must still be considered according to the applicable legal process.
What Is a Trial-Within-Trial?
One important legal issue in the case concerns statements allegedly obtained from suspects during the investigation.
Some defendants have challenged the admissibility of those statements, arguing that they were not made voluntarily.
The prosecution has rejected those claims.
Where the voluntariness of a statement is disputed, the court can conduct a trial-within-trial to determine whether the statement was made voluntarily and can therefore be admitted as evidence.
The issue is significant because statements attributed to suspects can form an important part of a prosecution’s case.
Did the Alleged Coup Actually Happen?
No.
There is no indication in the supplied records that the alleged coup was successfully executed.
Ma’aji’s statement says there was no “D-Day” and that the group was still waiting for sufficient resources, personnel and other preparations.
The prosecution alleges that there was a conspiracy to overthrow the government, but the alleged operation was disrupted before the proposed execution stage.
Whether the defendants committed the offences with which they have been charged is now a matter for the courts.
What Do the Records Prove — and What Do They Not Prove?
This distinction is crucial when following the case.
The investigative records provide evidence of what investigators say they discovered and include a statement attributed to Ma’aji describing the alleged development of the plan.
They also contain allegations about meetings, funding, recruitment, access to government facilities and proposed actions against senior officials.
But the records do not amount to a final judicial determination that every allegation is true.
The defendants have denied wrongdoing.
Some individuals named in allegations have also denied involvement.
The courts must therefore assess the evidence before reaching any conclusions about criminal responsibility.
Why Is This Case Important?
The alleged plot is significant because it involves claims of an attempt to overthrow a democratically elected government.
It also raises questions about the relationship between political dissatisfaction, military intervention and constitutional government.
The records show how discussions about economic hardship and governance allegedly evolved into plans involving recruitment, funding, access to strategic locations and military intervention.
But the case also demonstrates why allegations involving national security must be reported carefully.
A claim that someone planned a coup is extremely serious.
It can damage reputations and have major political consequences even before a court reaches a verdict.
That is why the distinction between investigative claims, prosecution allegations, defence responses and proven facts is essential.
What Happens Next?
The court proceedings will determine whether the prosecution can prove the allegations against the defendants.
The cases may continue to involve disputes over evidence, statements, financial transactions and the interpretation of communications and documents gathered during the investigation.
For the defendants, the central issue will be whether the prosecution can establish the offences charged against them.
For the prosecution, the challenge will be connecting the evidence to each individual defendant and demonstrating the alleged offences to the required legal standard.
Until those proceedings are concluded, claims about the alleged coup should remain allegations rather than established facts.
Frequently Asked Questions
Was there an actual coup against President Tinubu?
No successful coup took place. The case concerns an alleged plot that investigators say was developed but never reached its proposed execution stage.
Who is Colonel Mohammed Ma’aji?
Colonel Mohammed Ma’aji is a serving military officer identified by investigators as a key figure in the alleged conspiracy. He is facing proceedings before a General Court Martial and has denied wrongdoing.
Why was the alleged coup plan revived?
According to a statement attributed to Ma’aji, the plan was revived after he failed for a second time to secure promotion to brigadier general in 2024. He also cited broader concerns about economic and political conditions.
What issues did Ma’aji cite?
His statement referred to fuel subsidy removal, naira reforms, taxation, electricity tariffs, corruption, insecurity, unemployment and the handling of protests.
Was President Tinubu allegedly targeted?
The prosecution has alleged that the plotters intended to capture or eliminate senior political figures, including President Tinubu. These claims remain allegations before the court.
Were the service chiefs allegedly targeted?
According to Ma’aji’s statement, part of the alleged plan involved placing the service chiefs under arrest.
Did the alleged plotters have enough manpower?
According to Ma’aji’s account, they did not. He said the proposed team had not been fully formed and that the group was still waiting for additional resources and personnel.
What happened to the alleged plan?
According to the investigative records, the plan was disrupted after security agencies began investigating the suspected conspiracy in 2025.
Have the defendants pleaded guilty?
No. The defendants in the Federal High Court proceedings pleaded not guilty. The serving military officers are facing separate proceedings before a General Court Martial.
Has anyone been found guilty?
The supplied material does not establish a final conviction in the cases. The allegations remain subject to judicial determination.
Conclusion
The alleged anti-Tinubu coup case is more complicated than a simple story of military officers deciding to overthrow a government.
According to the investigative records, the discussions began amid concerns about insecurity, corruption, economic hardship and governance. The alleged project struggled with funding and manpower, was suspended and later revived.
The investigation records describe meetings in Abuja, attempts to recruit additional personnel, alleged efforts to obtain access to the Presidential Villa, plans involving senior military officials and financial transactions that prosecutors say are connected to the suspected operation.
But the most important fact for readers to keep in mind is that the case has not been finally decided by the courts.
The defendants have denied wrongdoing, and some of the allegations have been specifically disputed.
The court proceedings will ultimately determine which parts of the prosecution’s case can be proven.
For now, the records provide a detailed picture of what investigators allege happened — but they should not be mistaken for a final verdict on the guilt or innocence of the people accused.
