Supreme Court Concludes Decades-Long Murder Case Against Former Presidential Hopeful
The Supreme Court of Nigeria has delivered a definitive ruling in one of the country's most high-profile criminal cases, dismissing the Lagos State government's appeal against the acquittal of Major Hamza Al-Mustapha (rtd) for the murder of pro-democracy activist Kudirat Abiola. This decision brings to a close a legal saga that has spanned nearly three decades, involving multiple judicial levels and significant political implications.
Judicial Panel Cites Prosecutorial Abandonment
On Thursday, January 22, 2026, a five-member panel of the Supreme Court led by Justice Uwani Aba-Aji ruled that Lagos State had effectively abandoned its appeal through prolonged inaction. The court noted that since 2014, when leave was initially granted to challenge Al-Mustapha's acquittal, the state government had failed to file necessary legal processes or appear through representation despite receiving repeated hearing notices.
Justice Aba-Aji emphasized that nine years represented more than sufficient time for the prosecution to act, describing the state's failure to proceed as a clear indication that the appeal had been abandoned. The ruling specifically dismissed appeal numbers SC/CR/45/2014 and SC/CR/6/2014, both filed by the Lagos State government seeking to overturn the appellate court's decision that had cleared Al-Mustapha of all charges.
Background of the Controversial Case
The legal proceedings originated from the shocking assassination of Kudirat Abiola on June 4, 1996, in Lagos. As the wife of Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola, the presumed winner of the annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election, her killing became a symbol of the struggle against military dictatorship in Nigeria. Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, who served as chief security officer to the late military head of state General Sani Abacha, was accused of ordering the murder.
In 2012, a Lagos High Court sentenced Al-Mustapha to death by hanging, but this verdict was overturned the following year by the Court of Appeal. Justice Rita Pemu of the appellate court ruled that the charges appeared politically motivated and that no concrete evidence linked Al-Mustapha to the crime. The judge specifically stated: "There is no evidence linking the appellant to the offence. Therefore, the appellant is discharged and acquitted."
Political Context and Historical Significance
The case unfolded against the backdrop of Nigeria's turbulent transition from military rule to democracy. Following the annulment of the 1993 presidential election, General Sani Abacha seized power and initiated a repressive regime. MKO Abiola, who had declared himself president, was detained and died in custody in 1998, just one month after Abacha's own death from a heart attack.
Kudirat Abiola's assassination occurred while her husband remained imprisoned, and her death galvanized pro-democracy movements across Nigeria. The case against Al-Mustapha became emblematic of efforts to address human rights abuses during the military era, though the judicial process faced numerous delays and controversies over the years.
Legal Arguments and Final Resolution
During the Supreme Court proceedings, Al-Mustapha's counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Paul Daudu, argued that Lagos State had ignored a 30-day ultimatum issued in 2014 to file its notice of appeal. Daudu urged the court to dismiss the matter for want of diligent prosecution, a position ultimately adopted by the judicial panel.
The Supreme Court's ruling represents the final chapter in a case that has witnessed multiple twists since its inception. Notably, Mohammed Abacha, one of General Abacha's sons, was also accused of involvement in Kudirat Abiola's killing but was cleared in 2002 after three years in detention. The prosecution's failure to pursue its appeal for nearly a decade ultimately proved decisive in the Supreme Court's determination that the matter should be laid to rest.
This conclusion comes as Al-Mustapha has emerged as a presidential hopeful in recent years, adding contemporary political relevance to a case rooted in Nigeria's authoritarian past. The Supreme Court's decision underscores the importance of prosecutorial diligence while bringing closure to one of the nation's most enduring legal controversies.
