News Investigators/ A Department of State Services (DSS)’ investigator, on Wednesday, said that Mr Tukur Mamu lived above his means during the abduction of the passengers of the Abuja-Kaduna bound train by terrorist group in 2022.
The DSS operative, who testified as 6th prosecution witness (PW-6) in the ongoing terrorism trial of Mamu, told Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The witness, who gave his testimony behind a witness screen for security reason, stated this while being led in evidence by the DSS lawyer, David Kaswe.
When the lawyer asked him what the findings of Mamu’s investigation was, the PW-6 saids their investigation revealed “that during the course of the negotiations, the defendant lifestyle suddenly change and was living way above his means.
“That the defendant encouraged the terrorists to negotiate the ransom payment with victims’ families.
“That the defendant benefitted from the ransom paid by the victims.
“That the defendant collected ransom on behalf of the terrorists, confirmed the amount and facilitated the delivery.
“That the defendant was in illegal possession of a fire arm.
“That the defendant provided information to the terrorists on how to create a website.
“That the cash exhibit, money recovered from the defendant was in excess of the threshold permitted by law.
“That the defendant did not share the voice notes that he used in negotiating with the terrorists with other members of the CDS Committee.”
Besides, the PW-6 said the findings revealed that Mamu was not at any time appointed to negotiate with the terrorists on behalf of the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Committee which had the mandate to do so.
He said Mamu, rather, sidelined the CDS Committee to negotiate for the release of the train attack.
The witness further alleged that the defendant benefited financially from the ransom negotiations.
When Kaswe asked the witness to explain further on what he meant by Mamu’s lifestyle changing, he said the defendant was arrested in company of four of his family members who he sponsored on a trip to Egypt.
The officer added that Mamu also bought two flashy cars during the period of the negotiations.
While being cross-examined by Mamu’s counsel, Johnson Usman, SAN, the DSS investigator confirmed that DSS has its personnel in every airport in Nigeria.
He, however, said he could not confirm that Mamu, together with his arrested four family members, travelled to Egypt through Kano International Airport.
“I am not aware of that,” he said.
The witness, who confirmed he is a diligent investigator, agreed that Mamu’s travel documents were currently with the DSS.
“Confirm to my lord that there is no formal invitation to the defendant by DSS before, during and after the train attack rescue?” the lawyer asked.
Responding, the officer said: “I am not aware of any because he is in Kaduna and I am in Abuja.”
When he was asked if he had ever sighted any invitation extended to Mamu by DSS in the course of his investigation, the witness said: “No, my lord.”
When Usman also asked if he had sighted any document where the defendant was declared wanted by DSS, the witness said: “No my lord.”
When he was asked to confirm that the normal routine for international travellers is that the passport must be stamped at the entry and exit points, the investigator said: “I have never worked at an airport before.”
The PW-6 also told the court that he had never travelled outside Nigeria before.
When the lawyer asked him if he had opened the defendant’s passport in his possession in the course of his investigation, he responded in the negative.
“Do you agree with me that as a diligent investigator, you are supposed to know his movement from Nigeria and where he is arrested?” Usman asked.
Responding, the witness said Mamu was brought with a preliminary report.
He admitted reading the preliminary report.
“Did the report narrates his movement from Nigeria to Egypt?” the lawyer asked.
The DSS lawyer objected to Usman’s question on the ground that the witness cannot be asked questions on a report that was not before the court.
But Justice Umar intervened and said the witness, having mentioned the preliminary report, can be questioned in that regard.
The witness then responded to the question in the negative.
He confirmed that the Kaduna-Abuja train attack took place on March 28, 2022.
The investigator agreed that before the attack, he had never had any personal encounter with Mamu.
“And since you have never met him, I will be correct to say that you do not know his net worth?” Usman asked.
“That will be correct my lord,” the investigator responded.
The officer insisted that contrary to the question put to him, it was the terrorists who asked the victims of the attack to suggest names of persons they (terrorists) could contact to be involved in the negotiation.
“So the victims suggested several names to the terrorists and the terrorists contacted all the persons individually.
“So out of all the persons contacted, only the defendant indicated willingness to be part of the negotiation,” he said.
The lawyer then asked the witness to confirm that when Mamu was contacted, he thereafter joined the CDS Committee but the investigator said: “That is not correct my lord.”
When Usman asked the witness how many hostages were released before Mamu joined the negotiation, he said: “One.”
Justice Umar consequently adjourned the matter until Jan. 29, 2026, for continuation of trial.
NAN