A Federal High Court in Abuja was on Wednesday told that alleged ransom negotiator, Tukur Mamu, purchased vehicles and funded overseas trips for himself and relatives after purportedly earning proceeds from illegal negotiations with bandits.

Testifying behind a protective screen, the sixth prosecution witness, simply identified in court records as PW-6, said the defendant began living “far above his means” during the negotiations linked to the 2022 Abuja–Kaduna train attack.

“During the course of the negotiations, the defendant’s lifestyle suddenly changed and he was living way above his means,” the witness stated in open court under examination-in-chief conducted by counsel to the Department of State Services (DSS), David Kaswe.

Under cross-examination by the lead defence lawyer, Johnson Usman (SAN), PW-6 said Mamu was arrested in Egypt while travelling with four family members he personally sponsored. He also confirmed that the defendant acquired two cars within the ransom-talk window.

When asked by Usman to specify the lifestyle changes observed, the witness replied, “The defendant was arrested in company of four of his family members whom he sponsored on a trip. The defendant also bought two cars during the period of the negotiations.”

But the defence countered that the witness had no knowledge of Mamu’s pre-attack earnings or net worth.

“Confirm to My Lord that before 28 March 2022, you have never had a personal encounter with the defendant,” Usman queried.

The witness responded, “Yes, My Lord.”

Usman further pressed, “Since you did not have personal encounter with the defendant, you did not know his net worth.”

PW-6 agreed: “That’s correct.”

The defence counsel further argued that Mamu had three cars: a Toyota Venza, a Mercedes Benz E350, and a Hyundai salon car. Of the three, he said the defendant owned two before the train attack.

The defence counsel also argued that Mamu had been travelling abroad with family members for Hajj, Umrah and others before the train attack incident in 2022.

The defence noted that Mamu had travelled abroad with relatives for Hajj and Umrah well before the train attack year.

However, PW-6 also told the court that the Federal Government never assigned Mamu to negotiate with terrorists or ransom takers over the attack.

Reading directly from DSS findings, the witness stated: “He acted on his own for his benefit… He benefitted from ransom paid by families of the victims… He collected ransom on behalf of the terrorists, confirmed the amount and facilitated delivery illegally. He was in possession of illegal firearms. He provided information to terrorists on how to create a website. The cash recovered from his Kaduna residence was above the legal threshold. During negotiations, his lifestyle suddenly changed and he was living way above his means.”

Prosecutors said Mamu inserted himself into negotiations between victims’ families and the attackers for personal gain.

Middle-week testimony further revealed that Mamu was reportedly offered N50 Million reward by the leader of the terrorist faction.

PW-6 said an audio recording, extracted from the defendant’s devices, a Samsung tablet and two mobile phones seized by Egyptian authorities, captured conversations involving the terrorist kingpin known as “Shugaba.”

In the audio clip played in court, the man said to be Shugaba allegedly praised Mamu and ordered him to “remove N50m” from a delivered ransom for himself.

When pressured on whether travel details were verified, PW-6 admitted he did not examine Mamu’s passport, even as he insisted he was a diligent investigator.

He said opening the passport was unnecessary because he relied on a preliminary report, though he acknowledged that Mamu’s passport was in DSS custody.

Responding to another defence argument, Usman said victims proposed multiple names to liaise with the kidnappers, an assertion conceded by the witness.

The court heard that while names were indeed introduced by victims, only Mamu accepted to lead talks, even though he was not part of the Chief of Defence Staff Committee earlier set up to secure hostage release.

Usman argued that only one abducted passenger had been released before Mamu got involved, contradicting claims that he was central to early recoveries.

The witness maintained that Mamu’s role was neither authorised nor formal, stressing again that he was not part of any licensed government negotiation track.

Justice Mohammed Garba Umar adjourned further cross-examination of the anti-terror probe witness to January 29, 2026.