After years of legal battles and prolonged uncertainty, a group of Military veterans has finally secured victory at the Supreme Court of Nigeria, which ruled in their favour in a dispute involving landed property and restoration of Major General Ibrahim Sani’s rank.
The judgement brings to a close a long-lingering case between the veterans and the Nigerian Army, ending a protracted legal contest that had moved through several layers of the judicial system before reaching the nation’s apex court.
At the heart of the dispute was a parcel of land Plot 2303 Asokoro Cad A04 behind Mogadishu Cantonment (formerly Sani Abacha Barracks) originally allocated to veterans who served the country in various military operations, including peacekeeping missions under the ECOWAS Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) and other national assignments.
The veterans had argued that the property was meant to serve as part of their welfare and post-service entitlements in recognition of their sacrifices during active service, particularly in conflict and peacekeeping operations.
Following years of litigation, the Supreme Court affirmed the position of the veterans, ruling that their claims were valid and that the rights attached to the property should be respected.
In the case marked SC/1497C/2019, the Nigerian Army is the appellant while Major General I. Sani is the respondent on behalf of the veterans. The judgment was delivered on January 30, 2026, by Justice Obande Festus Ogbuinya (Justice, Supreme Court) alongside alongside other four justices of the apex court.
According to the court records, the appeal stems from an earlier decision of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, delivered on April 18, 2019, which nullified the ruling of the Special Court Martial and ordered a retrial of the case. The Special Court Martial had earlier convicted the General and sentenced him to a reduction in rank and restitution of money contributed by Military veterans for infrastructure development.
Court documents indicate that the case originated from allegations involving the misuse of public service property, falsification of documents and related offences under the Armed Forces Act. The charges were linked to issues surrounding an uncharted land bordering Nigeria Army’s Land Plot 2302 behind Mogadishu Cantonment Asokoro Abuja.
The respondent, who served as a Major General and Chief of Transformation and Innovation at Army Headquarters at the time, was arraigned before the General Court Martial on a nine-count charge. After the trial, the court martial found him guilty on several counts and imposed sanctions, though he was acquitted on some of the charges.
However, stakeholders at that time expressed concern on the jurisdiction of the special military court marshal to preside over land matters as provided in the incorporation of the Land Use Act of 1978, which is solidified in Section 315(5)(d).
Dissatisfied with the outcome, the General approached the Court of Appeal, which subsequently ruled in his favour, setting aside the conviction and directing that the matter be retried.
However, the Nigerian Army challenged the appellate court’s ruling at the Supreme Court, arguing that the Appeal Court erred in law by overturning the decision of the Special Court Martial.
“On the whole, having resolve the duo issues against the appellant, the destiny of the appeal is obvious. It is destitute of any morsel of merit and the reserve penalty of dismissal. Consequently, I dismiss the appeal. Accordingly, the judgement of the lower court, in appeal No. CA/A/791C/2017, delivered on the 18th April, 2019, which set aside the decision of the GCM and ordered a retrial of the respondent in charge No. NA /COAS/G/1/39, delivered on the 20th July, 2017 is hereby affirmed in it’s entirety.”
- OBANDE FESTUS OGBUINYA (Justice, Supreme Court).
In a further clarification, an Abuja based Legal Practitioner explained that the term “set aside” as uphold in the ruling of the Apex Court simply means that the court has vacated or void a prior order, as if the order/judgement never existed i.e that the Court Martial effort/exercise never existed.
During the proceedings, the apex court also considered a preliminary objection raised by the respondent, which sought to dismiss the appeal on grounds that some of the grounds of appeal were incompetent. After reviewing the arguments of both parties, the court dismissed the objection and proceeded to consider the substantive issues raised in the appeal.
The decision was received with excitement and relief among the affected veterans, many of whom had waited for years to see justice served after what they described as a difficult and exhausting legal journey.
Some of the surviving beneficiaries of the land and next of kin of the deceased expressed gratitude to the judiciary for standing by the principles of justice and fairness, noting that the ruling restores confidence in the rule of law.
Family members of some of the deceased veterans who died while waiting for the resolution of the case also welcomed the judgement, saying it brings honour to the memory of those who served the country but did not live to witness the outcome.
Legal observers commented that the ruling underscores the authority of the courts in safeguarding the rights and welfare of military personnel, especially in matters concerning their entitlements after service.
For the veterans, however, the judgement represents more than a legal victory. It marks the end of a long struggle and the beginning of the renewed hope agenda of the current administration for military veterans.