Nigerian Army Colonel Mohammed Ma’aji, has explained the motive behind a said plot to forcefully overthrow Nigeria’s democratically elected government in a coup d’état. He said that the plot was driven by patriotism, concern over worsening conditions in the country, and what he described as a desire to rescue Nigeria from a dangerous trajectory.
Ma’aji allegedly spearheaded the plan, which was uncovered in September 2025 before it could be executed, triggering the arrest and interrogation of serving and retired military officers as well as civilians suspected of playing various roles in the alleged conspiracy.
In 2025, after more than three decades of Nigeria’s clean break from military coups, the alleged attempt resulted in a series of arrests and interrogations involving military personnel and civilians accused of participating in the alleged plan to topple President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration.
In its first official reaction to the matter, the Defence Headquarters (DHQ) did not categorically deny that the military officers were involved in an alleged coup plot. Instead, it said the “ongoing investigation involving” the arrested officers was “a routine internal process aimed at ensuring discipline and professionalism is maintained within the ranks.”
The alleged plot, uncovered in late September 2025, unsettled the Tinubu administration and was followed, among other developments, by the cancellation of the October 1 Independence Day Parade and changes in the military hierarchy, including the removal of then Chief of Defence Staff, Christopher Musa.
Although media reports linked the cancellation of the parade to the alleged coup plot, the DHQ explained that the event was called off to enable the President “attend a strategic bilateral meeting outside the country.”
The DHQ later acknowledged that there had indeed been an alleged plot to oust the Tinubu government and said indicted officers would face military judicial panels. Drawing on interviews with intelligence sources, Premium Times has extensively reported on the alleged conspiracy, beginning with the initial arrest of 16 serving military officers in September.
By February, about 40 people, including senior military officers across the armed forces, a police officer and civilians allegedly involved in reconnaissance, funding and propaganda activities, had been arrested in connection with the alleged conspiracy. For the first time, however, this newspaper is reporting authoritatively in a series of exclusive publications based on a trove of confidential documents running into about 7,424 pages.
The documents include bank statements, exchanges on encrypted messaging platforms, hotel receipts and records of items purchased, as well as statements from participants and non-participants whose financial dealings allegedly linked them to the suspected coup planners.
Ma’aji, a 50-year-old Nigerian colonel who failed his promotion examination to the rank of brigadier general twice, explained to military investigators how he conceived the alleged plot and the motivation behind it. Ma’aji was arrested on September 29, 2025, the same day the Nigerian government cancelled the Independence Day parade.
According to statements signed by him and a military investigator at the headquarters of the Nigerian Army Corps of Military Police (NACMP) in Asokoro, Abuja, he was interrogated between October 18, 2025, and February 19, 2026. In April, the Federal Government filed 13 charges against six individuals accused of being involved in the alleged coup plot.
They are retired Major-General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana, retired Navy Captain Erasmus Ochegobia Victor, Police Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, electrician Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni and Zaria-based Islamic cleric Abdulkadir Sani. While the former military officers and civilians are being tried in a civil court, serving military officers, including Ma’aji, are facing trial before a court-martial.
According to documents reviewed for this report, more than 30 officers and civilians were interrogated by military investigators. Their statements form part of the prosecution’s case, although their admissibility remains contested after several defendants told the court that the statements were not made voluntarily.
The dispute prompted the court to order a trial-within-trial to determine whether the statements were obtained voluntarily before ruling on whether they could be admitted as evidence in the substantive proceedings.
