A courtroom drama with high-profile implications unfolded on Tuesday as three members of the same family accused of stealing N300 million worth of gold jewelry moved to unseat the trial judge, alleging bias and pretrial prejudice.
The defendants, Rukhayat Usman Abbeyson, her mother Lauretu Ahmed, and her brother Sagir Ahmed — are pushing for Justice Njideka Nwosu-Iheme to withdraw from the case, accusing her of crossing the line from arbiter to accuser.
According to a motion filed by their counsel, Ishaka M. Dikko, SAN, the family claimed that the judge made a damning comment during an early court appearance suggesting they had already confessed to the crime — a comment they say shredded any chance of a fair trial.
Their complaint stemed from a June 4, 2024 hearing, during which Justice Nwosu-Iheme allegedly said:
“Are these not the people that stole gold worth N300m and there is a voice recording of them confessing to it—is that why they are running away from it?”
That comment, paired with the court’s refusal to grant bail despite the 1st defendant being a new mother recovering from surgery has led the defense to accuse the judge of bias thereby demand the case be reassigned to a more “neutral” judge by the Chief Judge of the FCT.
Prosecuting counsel Adama Musa, however, rejected the motion as an attempt to pressure the court, asserting that the judge’s decisions, including bail refusal, were lawful exercises of judicial discretion.
He warned that allowing such motions to succeed would set a dangerous precedent of litigants choosing their judges.
Justice Nwosu-Iheme has now reserved her ruling on the recusal request, leaving the fate of the trial—and the question of judicial impartiality—in limbo.
The accused are being tried for allegedly conspiring to steal gold jewelry from the Abuja residence of their former employer, Hajia Halima Suleiman, on March 23, 2024. Abbeyson, the complainant’s personal assistant, is accused of masterminding the theft using her access to a private safe.
Prosecution evidence includes witness statements, voice recordings, photographs of the stolen items, and financial records from multiple banks. The defendants insist they are innocent and say the case is being manipulated to secure a conviction by any means.
Legal analysts say the outcome of the recusal request could have wide-ranging implications for public trust in the judiciary—especially in cases involving wealth, power, and allegations of elite crime.
