Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Henry Owen
Abuja, Nigeria — Family members of the slain pro‑democracy icon Alhaja Kudirat Abiola, senior advocates, human rights groups and civil society organisations have reacted with deep dismay and anger after the Supreme Court of Nigeria effectively brought an end to nearly three decades of legal pursuit in her murder case, following a finding that the Lagos State Government abandoned its appeal against the acquittal of Major Hamza Al‑Mustapha (retd.) more than nine years ago.
The apex court’s unanimous ruling, delivered on January 22, 2026 by a five‑member panel led by Justice Uwani Aba‑Aji, dismissed the state’s appeal on procedural grounds after it was established that the government failed to file any legal processes or appear in court despite repeatedly being served with hearing notices. The judgment marked the formal closure of the high‑profile legal battle surrounding one of Nigeria’s most symbolic assassinations, leaving many to describe the outcome as a grave miscarriage of justice.
Kudirat Abiola, wife of the late Chief M.K.O. Abiola, the presumed winner of Nigeria’s annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election, was assassinated in Lagos on June 4, 1996 amid nationwide pro‑democracy protests. After years of investigation, she was ultimately linked to a conspiracy of political suppression under the late military regime of General Sani Abacha. In January 2012, a Lagos High Court convicted Major Al‑Mustapha, then Chief Security Officer to Abacha, along with co‑accused, and sentenced them to death by hanging. On appeal, the conviction was overturned in 2013 on the basis of evidentiary weaknesses, prompting Lagos State to pursue further appeal.
Critics say the Supreme Court judgment, grounded in procedural inaction by the state government, has deprived the Abiola family and the nation of substantive judicial closure. Jamiu Abiola, one of Kudirat Abiola’s sons, described the abandonment of the appeal as “unjustifiable and painful,” noting that 2026 marks the 30th anniversary of his mother’s assassination. He lamented that the prolonged delay inflicted “emotional torture” and warned that those responsible for her death — and those who have enabled their evasion of justice — would face moral reckoning.
Senior legal voices expressed similar disappointment. Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Ebun‑Olu Adegboruwa criticised the Lagos State Government for squandering public trust and failing to see through what he described as a case of national significance rooted in Nigeria’s pro‑democracy struggle. He argued that the government’s inaction undermined the historical importance of Lagos as the cradle of democratic aspirations and betrayed victims’ families.
Human rights organisations also weighed in forcefully. Amnesty International Nigeria said the outcome reflected an institutional failure by Lagos authorities to pursue justice where it mattered most, asserting that the government had a “responsibility to provide all support and resources to ensure justice” given that the crime occurred within its jurisdiction and involved a figure of national prominence. The group urged an independent inquiry into atrocities committed during and after the June 12 struggle and called for compensation for victims’ families.
Civil society voices painted a broader picture of frustration and disillusionment with the justice system. Hassan Taiwo, convener of the Youth Rights Campaign, warned that the ruling risked normalising impunity, suggesting that unresolved cases from the era of military rule could embolden criminal elements and political actors alike. “This is more or less the final nail in the coffin of June 12,” he said, asserting that such decisions erode public confidence in democratic institutions.
However, some senior lawyers offered a more tempered analysis. Victor Okpara, SAN, posited that the abandonment may reflect practical legal challenges, including the quality and availability of admissible evidence, which could have influenced the state’s decision not to pursue further appeal. Another senior counsel suggested that shifts in government leadership and legal personnel over the years may have contributed to a loss of continuity in the case’s prosecution.
Prominent human rights lawyer Femi Falana, SAN, who has previously challenged the handling of the case before the ECOWAS Court of Justice on behalf of the Abiola family, stressed that while the closure of the appeal represents a setback, it does not extinguish all avenues for seeking accountability. Falana reiterated historical testimony from previous inquiries that implicated Al‑Mustapha in the assassination, underscoring longstanding concerns over unresolved accountability for politically motivated killings in Nigeria.
The Supreme Court’s ruling has reignited national debate over the handling of politically sensitive cases and the broader challenges of ensuring accountability for crimes connected to Nigeria’s turbulent political history. For many Nigerians, particularly those who view the murder of Kudirat Abiola as emblematic of the struggle for democracy, the closure of the case raises difficult questions about institutional commitment to justice and the imperatives of historical memory.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments