The Department of State Services (DSS) has said it will challenge the life imprisonment sentences handed to two senior commanders of the Ansaru terrorist group by the Federal High Court in Abuja.
On Monday, Justice Emeka Nwite sentenced the two men to life imprisonment after they pleaded guilty to a 32-count charge bordering on terrorism and related offences.
The court delivered the judgment after the convicts and their counsel appealed for leniency, urging the judge to temper justice with mercy.
The convicted terrorists are Mahmud Usman, also known as Abu Bara’a, Abbas, or Mukhtar, and Abubakar Abba, also known as Mahmud al-Nigeri or Malam Mamuda, who was identified as Usman’s deputy and chief of staff.
Reacting to the judgment, a senior DSS official said the agency considers the punishment insufficient in view of the seriousness of the offences committed.
According to the official, the two suspects had initially indicated their intention to plead guilty but later changed their position around the time pupils and teachers were abducted in Oriire Local Government Area of Oyo State by suspected members of the same terrorist group.
“For the nearly 60 days the kidnappers held on to the pupils and teachers of Oriire, the Ansaru commanders in our custody changed,” the official said.
“One of the top conditions the abductors gave was the unconditional release of these same Ansaru commanders in exchange for the Oriire kidnap victims.”
The DSS official said the defendants, who had earlier pleaded not guilty, later told the court they were undecided on the plea they intended to enter.
“Justice Nwite even had to hand them an ultimatum to make up their minds on or before Monday’s sitting.
“After the Oriire rescue, they came to court to plead guilty to all the charges.
“Allowing the two terror commanders walk away with life sentences will not serve the cause of justice for the two Oriire teachers beheaded by their abductors.
“The reason the terrorists beheaded the two Oriire teachers was to put pressure on government to release these two Ansaru commanders.
“It, therefore, wouldn’t be fair to see two men beheaded and their families are made to live with the losses without adequately bringing the culprits to book.”
BACKSTORY:
The Department of State Services (DSS) is Nigeria’s domestic intelligence agency, responsible for gathering intelligence and investigating threats to national security, including terrorism, espionage, sabotage, and other serious crimes. In recent years, the agency has intensified its collaboration with the military and other security agencies to investigate and prosecute suspected members of terrorist organisations operating across the country.
The case involves members of Ansaru—formally known as Jama’atu Ansarul Muslimina Fi Biladis Sudan—an extremist group that emerged in 2012 after splitting from Boko Haram. Ansaru is widely regarded as being affiliated with Al-Qaeda and has been linked to numerous attacks, kidnappings, and assaults on security personnel, particularly in northern Nigeria. The group has also been accused of maintaining operational links with extremist networks in the Sahel and Maghreb regions.
According to the prosecution, the convicted men were involved in terrorism financing, coordinating sleeper cells, kidnapping for ransom, illegal mining, and the manufacture of improvised explosive devices (IEDs). Security agencies have repeatedly warned that terrorist groups increasingly rely on criminal enterprises, including illegal mining and ransom payments, to fund their operations.
On July 21, 2026, the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Emeka Nwite, sentenced the two defendants to life imprisonment after they pleaded guilty to multiple terrorism-related offences. While the court also imposed prison terms on other counts, the DSS has expressed dissatisfaction with the sentence, arguing that the punishment does not reflect the gravity of the offences.
The agency’s decision to challenge the judgment underscores the broader debate over sentencing in terrorism cases in Nigeria. Prosecutors maintain that severe penalties are necessary to deter terrorism and protect national security, while the courts are required to impose sentences in accordance with the law and the facts established before them. The appeal process will determine whether the sentence should be upheld or varied by a higher court.
