Proceedings in the long-running trial of Rabiu Sheriff, a retired Assistant Police Commissioner and former Chief Security Officer to ex–Adamawa State Governor Murtala Nyako, were stalled on Thursday after the state’s Chief Judge, Justice Hafsat Abdulrahman, adjourned the case to February 26 for the adoption of the prosecution’s final written address.
The adjournment has once again revived controversy surrounding the case, particularly the defence’s insistence that what began as a civil property dispute was improperly transformed into a criminal prosecution following the intervention of the Department of State Services (DSS).
Sheriff’s lawyers argue that the matter arose from a contractual land purchase arrangement and should have remained within civil jurisdiction. They questioned the involvement of the DSS, citing provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Law which discourage detention in matters rooted in purely civil disputes.
Sheriff was initially detained for seven days by the DSS following a petition filed on behalf of Sebore Farms Limited, a company linked to the Nyako family, over an N80 million land transaction. According to the defence, the same complaint was already under investigation by the State Intelligence Bureau (SIB) of the Nigeria Police in Yola when DSS operatives allegedly took over the matter.
The defence identified the operatives involved as then Deputy Director Halilu Suleiman and then PSO Operations Mohammed Ali, accusing them of jurisdictional overreach and abuse of process. The DSS has not publicly responded to these allegations as of the time of filing this report.
Members of Sheriff’s legal team have since called on the DSS high command to review the actions of the named operatives, maintaining that the agency should not be drawn into what they describe as a purely commercial disagreement.
One of Sheriff’s lawyers told the court that the retired officer, who previously served in the Nigeria Police Force and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), was held for several days by the DSS over the dispute. This claim forms part of the defence’s submissions.
In a formal protest letter addressed to the DSS, Sheriff’s counsel, Barrister Gabriel Adiku, accused the complainants of “prosecutorial shopping,” arguing that taking the same complaint to multiple security agencies was improper. He stressed that the DSS mandate is limited to internal security matters and does not extend to business or contractual disputes, especially where the police were already conducting investigations.
The defence also referenced police records indicating that former Governor Nyako was requested to provide additional evidence during the SIB investigation. According to accounts cited by the defence, Mohammed Bamanga Nyako, a son of the former governor, allegedly claimed that his father was “too big” to appear before the commissioner of police or the Officer-in-Charge of SIB Yola. The defence argued that this alleged refusal led the SIB to discontinue its investigation.
Despite these objections, and allegations of abuse of power, the Adamawa State Government later filed criminal charges through the Attorney General’s office under the Administration of Criminal Justice Law. Sheriff was subsequently arraigned before the State High Court in Yola on charges relating to the alleged conversion of properties valued at N80 million.
Earlier in the trial, the court granted Sheriff bail on health grounds in the sum of N100 million, emphasising that bail is a constitutional right.
A dramatic twist occurred during the proceedings when a Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) official testified that Sebore Farms Ltd and Sebore Farms Export Process Zone—companies central to the dispute—were not found in the CAC’s registration records. Under cross-examination, the CAC state head confirmed that the company names did not appear in the commission’s database.
The defence has relied heavily on this testimony, along with documentary evidence from the CAC, to challenge the legal status of the entities and the ownership claims underlying the transaction.
Sheriff also told the court that payments for the disputed properties were made directly from his personal bank account to the vendor in five instalments, disputing allegations that he converted company assets. The vendor corroborated this account in court.
Sheriff further alleged that he and members of his legal team were detained and pressured during the early stages of the dispute while in DSS custody—claims that remain before the court.
With the prosecution yet to adopt its final written address and legal questions over jurisdiction, company registration, and investigative procedures still unresolved, proceedings are expected to resume on February 26.
