Abuja Quarry Remains Sealed, Mining Marshals Cite Ongoing Criminal Trial

Nigeria's Mining Marshals have provided further details regarding the persistent shutdown of a quarry located in Abuja, emphasizing that the premises remain sealed as an active crime scene tied to an ongoing criminal prosecution. They assert that operations at the facility cannot recommence until the Federal High Court concludes its proceedings. This explanation follows closely on the heels of a petition submitted by the affected company to President Bola Tinubu and other senior government officials, contesting the 13-month suspension of its activities and claiming the enforcement was both illegal and without judicial authority.

In response to these claims, the Commander of the Mining Marshals stated that the quarry's closure was not merely an administrative penalty. Instead, he clarified that the site was sealed because it represents the *locus criminis* – the scene of the crime – in a criminal case presently before the judiciary. He revealed that the company and its senior management personnel are currently facing charges under Charge No. FHC/ABM/VR/338/2026. The accusations centre on illegal mining operations conducted within a mineral title area that is lawfully owned by a different entity.

The Commander further elaborated that the decision to prosecute stemmed from thorough investigations initiated by multiple petitions from the aggrieved company, spanning over a year. These petitions were then forwarded by both the Minister of Solid Minerals Development and the Minister of Interior to the Mining Marshals, via the Commandant-General of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps, for comprehensive investigation and subsequent legal action.

He disclosed that the arrests of the defendants took place at specific geographical coordinates: longitude 7°17’24″E and latitude 8°52’11″N. The Mining Marshals' investigations determined that these coordinates are situated within Mining Lease No. 000395 ML, which is legally assigned to another company. As corroboration, the agency referenced a letter from the Mining Cadastre Office, dated January 23, 2026, which reportedly verifies that the contested coordinates are indeed located within the complainant's officially licensed mining territory.

Furthermore, the Mining Marshals disclosed that among the evidence slated for presentation in court is a piece of correspondence purportedly authored by a member of the defence team during the investigative period. The Commander stated that this letter, dated August 12, 2025, and allegedly penned under the defendants' directives, contains confessions pertinent to the charges currently being litigated.

He asserted that the prosecution's argument encompasses more than just the contested coordinates and correspondence, characterizing the compiled documentary evidence from the investigation as substantial and challenging to dispute. The agency also expressed reservations about what it termed the defendants' efforts to seek administrative solutions while both criminal and civil legal actions concerning the disagreement are still pending in court.

“The issues raised by the defendants are already the subject of judicial proceedings,” the Commander quoted, issuing a caution against any actions that could compromise or prejudice the ongoing cases. He went on to allege that the defendants were employing “every extrajudicial means” to impede the criminal proceedings, contending that their recent petition to the President should not be officially entertained.

He suggested that the petition was part of a wider strategy to influence public perception, particularly after what he described as failed attempts to harass him through submissions to the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC). The Commander firmly stated that neither public relations campaigns nor institutional pressures would dissuade the Mining Marshals from prosecuting the case.

“No matter the level of blackmail and harassment deployed by illegal mining and erring industry players, the Mining Marshals will not be deterred from ensuring that the full weight of the law is pressed very tightly against everyone who breaks the laws in the Nigerian mining sector,” he declared.

He also urged media organizations to reinforce their editorial scrutiny to prevent the spread of unverified or unsubstantiated reports in the public sphere. He emphasized that the media is a crucial partner in the Federal Government's current reforms within the solid minerals sector, playing a vital role in advocating for legal and responsible mining operations.

Regarding the status of the workers initially apprehended during the enforcement actions, the Mining Marshals explained that prosecutors had previously modified the charge to omit them. This decision was based on the understanding that they were acting as employees of a known principal and might not have harbored the necessary criminal intent for prosecution. Nevertheless, the agency noted that recent events, such as some workers participating in protests concerning the shutdown, have triggered a re-evaluation of this earlier decision.

The Commander revealed that prosecutors have now received instructions to explore the possibility of re-including the affected workers in the criminal proceedings, should evidence indicate a more significant level of involvement in the alleged illegal mining operations. Furthermore, the Mining Marshals vehemently denied any accusations suggesting that their enforcement actions were motivated by financial inducements.