'How we tracked, arrested attackers of Owo church' - DSS witness
A Federal High Court in Abuja heard on Thursday how the alleged perpetrators of the June 5, 2022, attack at the St. Francis Catholic Church in Owo, Ondo State, were
- …Prosecution closes case with 11 witnesses
A Federal High Court in Abuja heard on Thursday how the alleged perpetrators of the June 5, 2022, attack at the St. Francis Catholic Church in Owo, Ondo State, were tracked and apprehended by operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS).
The DSS is currently prosecuting five men - Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza (25 years), Al Qasim Idris (20 years), Jamiu Abdulmalik (26 years), Abdulhaleem Idris (25 years), and Momoh Otuho Abubakar (47 years) over the attack.
The prosecution, which commenced on August 1, 2025, is one of the most swiftly conducted terrorism prosecutions by the DSS, which saw it featuring 11 witnesses within the time.
Testifying as the prosecution's 11th witness on Thursday, a DSS operative, identified as SSK, told the court his team deployed technical means to trace, locate, and arrest the alleged perpetrators of the attack, which led to the death of about 40 worshipers.
SSK, who said he is currently the Digital Forensic Lead at the Counter-Terrorism Investigation Department of the DSS, was led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer, Ayodeji Adedipe (SAN).
The witness said that following the terrorist attack on June 5, 2022, the Director General of the DSS directed his team to trace, locate, and apprehend the perpetrators.
He said his team applied what he called, call geospatial network filtering and cell tower triangulation in its investigation.
The witness added, "With these applications, we were able to filter thousands of mobile phones that had contact with the cell tower in Owaluwa, Elegbeka, and Ifon.
"As a result of this, we narrowed it down to one of the defendants' phone numbers. The defendant is identified as Idris Abdulmalik Omeiza (the first defendant)
"The system revealed a unique identification number, the International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) associated with the first defendant's phone,
"This number is a unique digital fingerprint associated with every phone, meaning that no two phones have the same IMEI.
"This enabled us to trace, locate, and arrest the first defendant. His arrest and confession led to the arrest of other defendants.
We furthered the analysis by carrying out what we called the frequency of communication. Analysis revealed that the first defendant had bi-directional communication with two other defendants, namely Jamiu (third defendant) and Al-Qasim (second defendant).
"These three individuals exchanged several communications before the incident, and after the incident, that is, between 1st March 2022 and 30 July 2022, within the space of six months," the witness said.
SSK identified the digital forensic examination report, which he said his team produced, which the prosecuting lawyer tendered in evidence without an objection from the defence lawyer, Abdullahi Mohammad.
The prosecution also tendered through the PW11 a black Tecno mobile phone through the witness, without opposition from the defence.
Both the digital forensic examination report and the mobile phone were admitted into evidence by the court as Exhibits T and U.
The witness, who said the phone was retrieved from the first defendant, told the court that after the first defendant's arrest, the IMEI of the Tecno Phone matched the IMEI of the call data records.
When asked by Adedipe to give a summary of his team's findings in relation to the defendants' connection to the case, the witness said his team found that on the day of the incident, at about 7:23 am, the first defendant's "mobile phone was strangulated around 35 kilometres radius to the crime scene, that is, the church, a distance that can be covered within 30 to 40 minutes drive.
"Even though the first defendant applied the no phone call rule, as a trained terrorist, his mobile phone was active. And, shortly after the attack, analysis revealed movement of the mobile phone towards Ifon.
"In addition, we also checked the pre-attack days, which were on the 3rd and 4th of June 2022.
The first defendant's mobile phone was within the radius of Elegbeka and Ifon exis.
"There is what is called a silent witness. The movement of the phone from one cell tower to another gave us insight into the movement of the first defendant on pre-attack days and the day of the attack.
"The frequency of communication further revealed relationship analysis among the defendants.
Three of the defendants made several calls before and after the attack, which showed that they know one another and that their arrest is not by accident," the witness said.
Under cross-examination by Muhammad, the witness said it took his team over one month to locate and arrest the first defendant.
He said he could not recall the actual dates that the defendants were arrested, but that all the defendants were traced, located, and arrested in the month of August 2022 at different locations within Kogi and Ondo states.
When asked to specify where the first defendant was arrested, the witness said he was apprehended in Eika in Kogi State.
On why he did not bring the mobile phones of the other defendants to court, the witness said he brought only the black Tecno mobile phone because of its relevance to his team's investigation.
Earlier, under cross-examination, the 10th prosecution witness, identified as SSJ, insisted that he asked each of the first to fourth defendants if they could write the statements by themselves, and they informed him individually that they could not write perfectly well in English.
On whether he wrote the statements collectively or individually, the same day or separate days, the witness said he took the statements of the first to fourth defendants individually on the same day. l, which was August 18, 2022.
On how many hours it took him to take the statements, the witness said it took an average of 10 hours.
On whether the statements taken on August 18, 2022, were the only statements taken at the DSS headquarters, the witness said they were the only statements taken by him as an the investigator in the case
At the end of the 11th prosecution witness' testimony, Adedipe announced the closure of the prosecution's case.
When asked by the trial judge, Justice Emeka Nwite, how many witnesses he planned to call, the defence lawyer said he would call only the defendants as witnesses in the defence's case.
Muhammad said that for him to be fully prepared for defence, he needed to be provided with a copy of the fifth defendant's statement, which was tendered during Thursday's proceedings, and be allowed access to the defendants, who are currently being held in DSS' custody.
With the intervention of the judge, Adedipe promised to ensure that Muhammad was granted easy access to his clients for consultations before they open their case.
Justice Nwite adjourned till March 4 and 5 for the defence to open its case.
