Ardo, did not grant reasons for the up-to-date postponement but expressed regret over the inconvenience caused.
The up-to-date development marks the fourth time the ruling has been deferred.
The ruling is expected to establish whether statements allegedly obtained from some of the accused officers can be admitted as evidence in the continuing trial.
The defence had challenged the admissibility of the statements, alleging that some of the officers were coerced by officials of the Defence Intelligence Agency into making or reproducing statements containing facts they described as invalid.
The dispute over the statements led to a trial-in-trial, during which the defence called evidence to resist the circumstances in which the statements were obtained.
Defence lawyers argued that the statements failed to assemble the legal requirements for admissibility.
In the midst of other things, they alleged that lawyers or witnesses chosen by some of the accused were not introduce when the statements were made.
The defence furthermore questioned the absence of video recordings showing some of the officers writing their statements in the presence of their chosen witnesses, as required under pertinent provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.
The lawyers continued alleged that some of the accused officers were neither properly cautioned nor adequately advised of their rights ahead of making the statements.
The prosecution, still, presented evidence aimed at establishing that the statements were made voluntarily and excluding improper pressure.
Some of the accused officers gave contrary accounts during the trial-during-a-trial, alleging that they were subjected to coercion, intimidation, inducement and content abuse whilst in detention.
According to evidence ahead of the court, some of the officers alleged that they were made to suppose that reproducing thought statements would facilitate their matter.
They additional claimed that some statements had already been planned by intelligence officials and that they were compelled to duplicate or sign them despite allegedly not knowing some of the matters contained in the documents.
Some additionally told the court that they did not personally originate or record the statements attributed to them, alleging that they were forced to reproduce pre-written documents containing claims or admissions they considered invalid or unrelated to their knowledge.
The ruling on the admissibility of the disputed statements is expected to identify whether the prosecution will be allowed to rely on the statements as portion of its evidence in the current proceedings.
The postponement so supplementary delays the court’s determination of a key evidentiary dispute in the military trial.
The coup plot trial involves multiple Nigerian military officers accused of conspiring to overthrow the government of President Bola Tinubu on October 1, 2025.
The case arose from allegations investigated by the military authorities, principal to the officers’ arrest and prosecution ahead of a Spacious Court Martial in Abuja.
The accused officers have denied the allegations, although the trial has featured disputes over the circumstances in which some of their statements were obtained, including defence claims of coercion and other forms of improper treatment.
M.U. Alhaji of the Nigerian Air Force and sits at the Scorpion Officers’ Mess, Asokoro, Abuja.
A attention issued to members of the court and other concerned parties said the sitting earlier adjourned to Wednesday had been postponed.
“The GCM sitting earlier adjourned to Wednesday, 30 September, 2026, has now been postponed to Monday, 5 October, 2026.
“The fresh sitting is scheduled to commence at 10 am at the Scorpion Officers’ Mess, Asokoro, Abuja,” the message stated.
The observe, signed by the Liaison Officer, Maj.
The Universal Court Martial sitting over the alleged coup plot involving some military officers has again postponed its ruling on the admissibility of statements made by the accused persons.
The ruling, earlier scheduled for Wednesday, September 30, 2026, has now been unchanging for Monday, October 5.
The court is presided over by Air Vice Marshal H.I.
