The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Sowore

  • Alleged cyberstalking: Court rejects Sowore’s documents in trial on false claim against Tinubu 

    Alleged cyberstalking: Court rejects Sowore’s documents in trial on false claim against Tinubu 

    …frowns at report of live streaming of proceedings 

    A Federal High Court in Abuja in two rulings on Wednesday rejected two sets of documents tendered by politician and online publisher, Omoyele Sowore in his ongoing trial on cyberstalking charge.

    Sowore is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS) for allegedly making false claim against the person of Present Bola Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in a post he made on his “X” and Facebook accounts.

    In the first ruling on Wednesday, Justice Mohammed Umar declined an oral application by Sowore’s lawyer, Marshall Abubakar that a set of documents, comprising print outs of publications, be admitted in evidence.

    The publications include media reports about DSS’ dismissal of 115 officials for misconduct, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charging five ex-governors with corruption, EFCC’s sacking 27 of its officials over fraud and misconduct and EFCC’s arrest of some ex-staff of the NNPCL over N7.2billion fraud.

    In the ruling, Justice Umar agreed with prosecuting lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN) that the best opportunity for the defendant to tender the documents is during the conduct of his defence. 

    The judge held that since the first prosecution witness (PW1) being cross-examined by Abubakar said he knew nothing about the publications contained in the documents, such documents could not be tendered through the witness.

    “You cannot tender a document through a witness who said he did not know anything about it.

    The document is marked as rejected,” Justice Umar said.

    In the second ruling, the judge rejected another set of documents which comprised of print outs of publications which Abubakar claimed showed that President Bola Tinubu had in 2011 called then President Goodluck Jonathan a drunkard and sinking fisherman, and also called former President Olusegun Obasanjo an expired meat.

    The judge marked the documents rejected for the same reason he gave in rejecting the first set of documents.

    Justice Umar frowned at the report by the prosecuting lawyer that a member of the defence team had live streamed previous proceedings in the case and urged the court to order an investigation to identify the person behind it.

    Although Abubakar denied that any member of the defence team was involved and claimed that it could have been done by the DSS or people in the presidency, the judge said such conduct amounted to contempt of court.

    Abubakar urged the court to only caution against a repeat of such incident, but to decline the request by the prosecuting lawyer that an investigation be ordered by the court.

    Justice Umar said it was easy to identify the person behind the incident and that he could direct security agencies to investigate the issue because it was a serious matter.

    Although the judge promised to address the issue at the end of the day’s proceedings, he however, remained silent on it when adjourning the case.

    While being cross-examined, PW2, Cyril Nosike (an official of the DSS) said as at the time Sowore made the post in respect of which he is being prosecuted,  President Tinubu’s official X (twitter) handle was @officialABAT

    The witness rejected Abubakar’s suggestion that the President’s official X handle is @PBAT.

    Nosike said he did not tender any court judgment before the court to show that corruption has ended in Nigeria.

    On whether there is corruption in Nigeria, the witness said he is not a politician and cannot make comment on such an issue, adding that the defence lawyer was merely asking for his opinion, saying: “I am not here to give my an opinion, but to state the facts.”

    He faulted claim by Abubakar that the DSS dismissed 115 of its officials for corruption, explaining that they were dismissed after internal investigation and not because of corruption as claimed by the defence lawyer.

    The witness denied knowing that in 2025 the EFCC charge five ex-governor to court because of corruption; that the EFCC arrested ex-staff of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) over N7.2billion fraud and that the EFCC dismissed 27 of its officers for fraud and misconduct.

    On whether as a security officer he is aware of global corruption ranking, witness said he is not aware of global corruption ranking. He also said he is not aware of the Transparency International corruption index.

    The witness equally said he is not aware that Nigeria is ranked 140 among the 180 countries captured in the global corruption index.

    On whether he knows that as at 2011, the current president was a major opposition figure in the country, witness said he did not know.

    On whether he is aware the in 2011 the current president called then President Goodluck Jonathan corrupt and shameless, the witness said he is not aware.

    Nosike also said he is not aware that the current President called Jonathan a drunkard and a sinking fisherman.

    On whether he knows former President Olusegun Obasanjo, the witness said yes. He however said 

    he is unaware that President Tinubu called ex-President Obasanjo an expired meat.

    The witness said he would be surprised if shown documents where Tinubu allegedly made such comments about the two former presidents.

    When asked if he has heard of the name Femi Fani Kayode, who is now an ambassador designate, the witness said yes, but added that he could not recall that Fani Kayode was a vocal critic of the President before his nomination as ambassador.

    Nosike denied knowledge of the claim by Abubakar that Fani Kayode made a post on social media alleging that President Tinubu knew something about the death of Funso Williams, who was a governorship candidate in Lagos State.

    The witness said he is not aware that the DSS screened Fani Kayode as an ambassador designate because that did not form part of his schedule.

    Nosike said he could not recall that Funso Williams was murdered in Lagos while President Tinubu was the governor of the state.

    He admitted knowing Chief Reno Omokri and confirmed that Omokri is an ambassador designate, appointed by this government.

    The witness said he is not aware of Omokri’s social media post claiming that Tinubu knows about the murder of Funso Williams, adding that he has not come across videos of Omokri saying Tinubu knows about Funso Williams’ murder.

    Read Also: ‘Why we charged Sowore over false claim against Tinubu,’ by DSS

    The witness said he is not aware that Omokri staged a protest against President Tinubu in London claiming that he (the President) was involved in drug trafficking and knew about Funso Williams’ murder.

    After spending one hour and 40 minutes on the cross examination of the PW1, Justice Umar asked Abubakar when he was going to conclude with the witness having cross-examined him for two days.

    Abubakar prayed the court for one more day l, claiming he has more important questions and documents to confront the witness with.

    Responding Kehinde recalled that Abubakar had, on the last date, sought for additional one hour to conclude, but has spent one hour and 40 minutes and yet claimed he was not done with the witness.

    Kehinde said  he would prefer to allow the judge decide whether or not to grant the adjournment being sought by the defence.

    Ruling, Justice Umar noted that this is the second day the defence has been cross examining the PW1. 

    The judge added that although on the last date, Abubakar sought for one hour, he has spent one hour and 40 minutes and has again asked for additional date.

    He, however, granted the adjornment sought by the defence, saying: “In the spirit of fairness, I will adjourn for the last time for cross examination,” and proceeded to adjourn till March 5 for further cross examination.

  • ‘Why we charged Sowore over false claim against Tinubu,’ by DSS

    ‘Why we charged Sowore over false claim against Tinubu,’ by DSS

    The Department of State Services (DSS) has said its decision to file a charge against online publisher and politician, Omoyele Sowore, was because of the security implications of the post he made on social media calling President Bola Tinubu a criminal.

    The DSS is prosecuting Sowore before a Federal High Court in Abuja for allegedly making false claim against the person of Present Bola Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in a post he made on his “X” and Facebook accounts.

    An official of the DSS,  Cyril Nosike explained the rationale behind Sowore’s prosecution while being cross-examined on Tuesday by the defendant’s lawyer, Marshall Abubakar.

    Abubakar, who played a video in court showing President Tinubu promising to protect the rights of all Nigerians, including those abusing him and calling him names, asked the witness to explain why the DSS decided to file the charge against his client despite the President’s promise.

    In response, the witness said his organisation filed the charge because of the security implications of the post made by Sowore.

    The witness said the video of President Tinubu, posted by Sowore on his social media platforms, was made in Brazil when the President went there on state visit.

    Nosike said he was not in Brazil with the President and did not personally record the video, which was also played in court again on Tuesday at Abubakar’s request.

    The witness said he downloaded the video when it was posted by the defendant, adding that he neither knew when the video was uploaded nor when it was made.

    The witness also said he neither knew who recorded the video nor 

    where the video was made in Brazil.

    Nosike said he did not interview the President regarding this video and that he did not also take any statement from the President to confirm if he was the person in the video.

    The witness also said he did not take statement from the President on the effect or otherwise of the video on him and that he did not know whether or not the President is aware of the post made by Sowore.

    He said he did not have before the court any defamation complaint from the President.

    The DSS officer, who said the President is the victim of the alleged post made by Sowore, said he is not aware that the DSS put Sowore on trial in 2019  for calling for a revolution in the country.

    The witness also said that is not aware that 2019 trial of the defendant is on the website of the DSS and is equally unaware that the defendant’s phone has been with the DSS since 2019.

    He said he did not know anything about a judgment of the court asking the DSS to release Sowore’s three phones to him.

    Read Also: Trial of Sowore over alleged cyber bullying of Tinubu resumes Jan 22

    At that point Abubakar tendered a certified true copy (CTC) order  made on February 19, 2024 by Justice Emeka Nwite of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which the defence lawyer claimed directed the DSS to release his client’s phones.

    Justice Mohammed Umar admitted the document in evidence.

    Abubakar also tendered a flash drive containing some videos, including one where President Tinubu, dressed in Igbo traditional attire, promised to protect the rights of all, and another one showing now Ambassador-designate, Reno Omokri, vowing not to accept any appointment under President Tinubu and calling him a drug lord during the last electioneering campaign.

    The video clips were later played in open court at Abubakar’s request.

    The witness said he did not know whether or not his agency carry out checks and screening of government’a appointees like judges, ministers and ambassadors.

    Nosike said he could not say why the DSS cleared Omokri, who called the President a drug lord, for ambassadorial appointment.

    Further hearing in the case resumes on February 4.

  • False claims against Tinubu: DSS tenders Sowore’s post in court

    False claims against Tinubu: DSS tenders Sowore’s post in court

    • Secret police play video evidence

    • Court frowns at defendant’s use of phone during proceedings

    The trial of politician and online publisher Omoyele Sowore opened yesterday in the cybercrime case against him.

    The prosecution called its first witness, Cyril Nosike, an official of the Department of State Services (DSS).

    The witness told the court that Sowore’s claim that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was a criminal generated tension and threatened public safety.

    The DSS is prosecuting Sowore for allegedly making a false claim against President Tinubu in a post he made on his X and Facebook accounts.

    The defendant is accused of contravening the provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024.

    Nosike, who was led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), said he is stationed at the Cyber Space Monitoring Centre of the DSS and that his duty includes monitoring the cyber space for 24 hours, night and day.

    READ ALSO: Critical success factors for Nigeria’s economy this year

    The witness said in the course of his duty on August 26, last year, at the Cyber Space Monitoring Centre, he detected and monitored a post by the defendant (Sowore) through his X platform.

    The DSS officer said the post referred to the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, about whom Sowore said: “This criminal @OfficialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is no MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!”

    The witness said when he came across the video, which Sowore allegedly posted and under which the defendant wrote the statement, he (the witness) downloaded it and saved it in a flash drive and marked it XYZ.

    When shown the flash drive and a certificate of compliance, he identified them as the items he referred to.

    The prosecuting lawyer then applied to tender them in evidence.

    Defence lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, said he would reserve his objection, which he intended to raise at the appropriate time.

    Justice Mohammed Umar admitted the flash drive and the certificate in evidence.

    Kehinde applied that the flash drive be played in the open court for everyone to see, a request the judge granted.

    The court played the video clip in the flash drive.

    The video showed President Tinubu speaking about the achievements of his administration and encouraged Brazilian businesses to invest in Nigeria because there is now a conducive business environment that is devoid of corruption.

    Shortly after the video was played, Kehinde noticed that Sowore, who stood in the dock, was using his mobile phone in the course of the court’s proceedings.

    The lawyer complained to the judge.

    Although Sowore attempted to deny using his phone, Justice Umar frowned at the attitude, saying it was wrong for a defendant to use a phone while the court was sitting.

    The judge directed an official of the court to retrieve the phone from the defendant and hand it over to his lawyer.

    Sowore refused to hand the phone to the lawyer, who moved close to him in the dock to retrieve the device.

    He told the court official: “Don’t touch my phone.”

    Sowore sought the court’s permission to hand the phone to his lawyer by himself, a request the court granted.

    The defendant thereafter walked off the dock and handed the phone to his lawyer, who was standing a few metres away.

    The judge directed Abubakar to place the phone on top of the table in front of the court.

    At the resumption of his testimony, Nosike said he made a screenshot of the attendant reactions of people to Sowore’s post on President Tinubu’s video.

    The witness said seeing the reactions to Sowore’s post, the DSS wrote official letters to the owners of the X platform and Facebook (Meta) through their email addresses.

    The witness said the letters were for the two social media platforms to take down Sowore’s post, “considering that the statement on that post was generating tension”.

    He said the DSS also sent an official letter to the defendant through his lawyers, who acknowledged receipt of the letter.

    Nosike also said the letter was meant to make Sowore retract his inciting post.

    The DSS official explained that even though the letter to him was a confidential document, Sowore posted a screenshot of the letter on his Facebook platform.

    The witness added: “As expected, the letter (which Sowore posted on Facebook) attracted reactions from Nigerians, both far and wide.

    “…The reactions to that letter were disparaging to the DSS and painted the service in a bad light.

    Kehinde tendered copies of the letters the witness referred to and his screenshots of the reactions to Sowore’s posts, which the court admitted in evidence.

    Nosike told the court that Sowore’s inciting posts complicated the work of security agencies like the DSS.

    He said: “We have officers and men who have sworn on oath to put themselves on the line for the security and stability of this country.

    “Such inciting posts that generate tension make our work more difficult, and we take such issues very seriously,” he said.

    At the conclusion of his evidence, the court directed Sowore’s lawyer to cross-examine the witness.

    But Abubakar begged the court for time to enable him study the witness’s testimony before he could cross-examine Nosike.

    Although Kehinde objected to the adjournment the defence sought, arguing that there was no basis for it, the judge agreed to adjourn the case but rejected Abubakar’s request for a date in February.

    Justice Umar adjourned till January 27 for cross-examination and continuation of the hearing.

    Abubakar had made efforts to frustrate the planned commencement of trial in the case.

    The lawyer claimed that the prosecution did not serve him the summary of witnesses’ testimonies and other relevant materials, as ordered by the court on the last adjourned date.

    He averred that in view of the alleged failure of the prosecution to comply with the court’s order, the defence had filed a motion for the striking out of the charge.

    But when the judge asked a court official to hand Abubakar a copy of the proof of service, which Kehinde had earlier submitted to the court, the defence lawyer glanced at the documents and claimed that they were forged.

    The lawyer also claimed that there was a disparity in the dates on the documents.

    But when his attention was drawn to the fact that the documents emanated from the court, he admitted service and apologised to both the prosecution and the court.

    It was at that point the judge ordered the prosecution to call its first witness.

  • Cyber defamation: Sowore’s post on Tinubu generated tension, threatened public safety – DSS witness

    Cyber defamation: Sowore’s post on Tinubu generated tension, threatened public safety – DSS witness

    • …court frowns at defendant using his phone during proceedings

    Trial opened on Thursday with the prosecution calling its first witness in the criminal defamation and cybercrime case against politician and online publisher, Omoyele Sowore.

    The witness, Cyril Nosike, an official of the Department of State Services (DSS), told the court that the false claim about President Bola Tinubu by Sowore, in which he called the president a criminal, generated tension and threatened public safety.

    Sowore is being prosecuted by the DSS for allegedly making a false claim against the person of President Bola Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in a post he made on his X and Facebook accounts.

    The defendant is accused of contravening the provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024

    Nosike, who was led in evidence by prosecuting lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), said he is stationed at the Cyber Space Monitoring Centre of the DSS and that his duty includes monitoring the cyber space for 24 hours, night and day.

    The witness said in the course of his duty on August 26, 2025, at the Cyber Space Monitoring Centre, he detected and monitored a post by the defendant (Sowore) through his X platform.

    He said the post referenced as such, “This criminal @OficialABAT, the X handle of the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces,” in which Sowore said to “This criminal @OfficialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is no MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!”

    The witness said that when he came across the video, which Sowore allegedly posted and under which the defendant wrote the statement, he (the witness) downloaded it and saved it on a flash drive and marked it XYZ.

    When shown the flash drive and a certificate of compliance, the witness identified them as the items he referred to, following which the prosecuting lawyer applied to tender them in evidence.

    Defence lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, said he would reserve his objection, which he intends to raise at the appropriate time.

    Justice Mohammed Umar proceeded to admit the flash drive and the certificate into evidence.

    Kehinde then applied that the flash drive be played in the open court for everyone to see, a request the judge granted, following which the video on the flash drive was played.

    The video showed President Tinubu speaking about the achievements of his administration and encouraged Brazilian businesses to invest in Nigeria because there is now a conducive business environment, where there is no corruption.

    Shortly after the video was played, Kehinde noticed that Sowore, who stood in the dock, was using his mobile phone in the course of the court proceedings and complained to the judge.

    Read Also: False claim against President: DSS’ trial of Sowore begins Thursday

    Although Sowore made an attempt to deny using his phone, Justice Umar frowned at the development, saying that it was wrong for a defendant to be using his phone while the court was sitting.

    The judge directed an official of the court to retrieve the phone from the defendant and hand it to his lawyer.

    Sowore, however, refused to hand the phone to the female court, who moved close to him in the dock to retrieve the phone. He told the court official, “Don’t touch my phone.”

    He then sought the court’s permission to hand the phone to his lawyer by himself, which the court granted, following which he walked off the dock and handed the phone to his lawyer, who was standing a few meters away.

    The judge then directed Abubakar to place the phone on top of the table in front of the court.

    At the resumption of his testimony, the witness said he made a screenshot of the attendant reactions of people to Sowore’s post of Tinubu’s video.

    He said seeing the reactions to Sowore’s post, the DSS wrote a letter officially to the owners of the X platform and Facebook (Meta) through their email addresses.

    The witness said the letters were for the two social media platforms to take down the post by Sowore, “Considering that the statement on that post was generating tension.”

    Nosike said the DSS also sent an official letter to the defendant through his lawyers, who acknowledged receipt of the letter. He said the letter was to demand that Sowore retract the inciting post that he made.

    He added that even though the letter to him was a confidential document, Sowore posted a screenshot of the letter on his Facebook platform.

    The witness added, “As expected, the letter (which Sowore posted on Facebook) attracted reactions from Nigerians both far and wide.

    And, the reactions to that letter were disparaging to the DSS and painted the service in a bad light.

    Kehinde proceeded to tender copies of the letters referred to by the witness and his screenshots of the reactions to Sowore’s posts, which the court admitted in evidence.

    The witness told the court that Sowore’s inciting posts complicate the work of security agencies like the DSS.

    He said, “We have officers and men who have sworn on oath to put themselves on the line for the security and stability of this country.

    “Such inciting posts that generate tension, make our work more difficult, and we take such issues very seriously,” the witness said.

    At the conclusion of his evidence in chief, the court called on Sowore’s lawyer to proceed to cross-examine the witness.

    But, in response, Abubakar begged the court for time to enable him study the witness’ testimony before he could cross-examine Nosike.

    Although Kehinde objected to the adjournment sought by the defence, arguing that there was no basis for that, the judge agreed to adjourn the case, but rejected Abubakar’s request for a date in February.

    Justice Umar adjourned till January 27 for cross-examination and continuation of the hearing.

    Earlier in the proceedings, Abubakar had made efforts to frustrate the planned commencement of the trial in the case.

    Abubakar claimed that the prosecution did not serve him the summary of witnesses’ testimonies and other relevant materials as ordered by the court on the last adjourned date.

    He said in view of the alleged failure of the prosecution to comply with the court’s order, the defence has filed a motion for the striking out of the charge.

    But, when the judge asked an official of the court to hand Abubakar a copy of the proof of service, which Kehinde earlier submitted to the court, the defence lawyer glanced at the documents and claimed that they were forged.

    He further claimed that there was a disparity in the dates on the documents.

    But, when his attention was drawn to the fact that the documents emanated from the court, he then admitted service and apologised to both the prosecution and the court, following which the judge ordered the prosecution to call its first witness.

  • False claim against President: DSS’ trial of Sowore begins Thursday

    False claim against President: DSS’ trial of Sowore begins Thursday

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed January 22 for the commencement of trial in the cyber-bullying case brought against the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC) in the 2023 general election, Omoyele Sowore, by the Department of State Services (DSS).

    Justice Mohammed Umar chose the date after Sowore was re-arraigned on a two-count amended charge.

    In the amended charge filed by the DSS, Sowore is accused of making false claim against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in a post he made on his X and Facebook accounts.

    The defendant is accused of contravening the provisions of the the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024.

    In the amended charge, Sowore is listed as the sole defendant.

    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, prosecuting lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), applied to withdraw the earlier charge, which had three defendants – Sowore, X Incorp (formerly Twitter) and Meta (Facebook) Incorp.

    Kehinde prayed the court to strike out the charge and the names of X Incorp (formerly Twitter) and Meta (Facebook) Incorp as defendants in the case, a request Justice Mohammed Umar granted and struck out the charge and the names of the other two defendants.

    Read Also: Release Sowore’s passport now, Hashim urges Tinubu

    When the first count of amended charge was read to Sowore by an official of the court, the sole defendant initially claimed not to understand the count, but later changed his mind after a brief consultation with his lawyer, Marshall Abubakar.

    Sowore later pleaded not guilty to the two counts on the amended charge.

    Further proceedings were stalled when Abubakar raised objection to Kehinde’s move to call the first prosecution witness.

    Abubakar argued that the prosecution had not provided the defendant with sufficient materials to enable him prepare for his defence.

    The defence lawyer cited Section 36(6) of the Constitution and Section 379(1) of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), saying his client was entitled to be served with the names of te prosecution’s witnesses, summary of their testimony, among others.

    Although Kehinde faulted Abubakar’s arguments, insisting that the prosecution had done all that was required of it, Justice Umar directed him to provide the defendant with the summaries of what his witnesses were coming to say during trial.

    The amended charge reads:

    * That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male, on or about August 25, 2025, did knowingly or intentionally send a message by means of a computer system or network, to wit: your official “X” (formerly Twitter) handle page, @YeleSowore, wherein you posted the following message/tweet: “This criminal officialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there Is NO MORE corruption under his regime In Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!” which message you knew fo be false and posted for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order in Nigeria, posing a threat to life or causing such message to be sent and thereby committed the offence of cyberstalking contrary to Section 24(1) (b) and 24(2) (a),(b) and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024 and punishable under the same section.

    * That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male, on or about August 25, 2025, did knowingly or intentionally send a message by means of a computer system or network, to wit: your official Facebook handle page, @YeleSowore, wherein you posted the following message/post: “This criminal @officialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is NO MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!” which message you knew to be false and posted for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order in Nigeria, posing a threat to life, or causing such message to be sent and thereby committed the offence of cyberstalking contrary to Section 24(1)(b) and 24(2) (a), (b), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024 and punishable under the same section.

  • Trial of Sowore over alleged cyber bullying of Tinubu resumes Jan 22

    Trial of Sowore over alleged cyber bullying of Tinubu resumes Jan 22

    Justice Mohammed Garba Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed January 22, 2026, to begin the trial of the African Action Congress (AAC) in the 2023 election, Omoyele Sowore, for the alleged criminal defamation of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

    The Department of State Services (DSS) in September 2025, filed a five-count charge against Sowore and social media platforms X Corp and Meta Incorporation, over posts calling President Tinubu “criminal.”

    Following a request by counsel to the DSS lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, the judge, on Monday, struck out names of the two foreign defendants.

    In a short ruling, Justice Umar removed X Corp., the owner of the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) and Meta Platforms Inc., the parent company of Facebook, as co-defendants in the new case.

    In the amended charge filed on December 5, 2025 Sowore was slammed by DSS with two count charges bothering on defamation of Tinubu as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. 

    The new charge at the Federal High Court in Abuja is marked FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025 and signed by Akinlolu Kehinde SAN on behalf of the federal government.

    COUNT ONE ,That you, Omoyele Sowore, Adult, Male, on or about the 25″ day of August 2025. within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did knowingly or intentionally send a message by means of a computer system or network, to wit: your official “X” (formerly Twitter} handle page, @YeleSowore. wherein you posted the following message/tweet: ‘This criminal @officialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is NO MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity fo ile shamelessly which message you knew fo be fake and posted for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order in Nigeria. posing a threat fo life, or causing such message to be sent and thereby committed the offence of Cyber stalking contrary to Section 24(1) (b) and 24(2) (a). (6), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention Amendment) Act, 2024 and punishable under the same section. 

    COUNT Two That you. Omoyele Sowore, Adult. Male, on or about the 25″ day of August, 2025. within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did knowingly or intentionally send a message by means of a computer system or network, fo wit: your Official Facebook handle page. @YeleSowore, wherein you posted the following message/post: “This criminal @officialABAT actually went fo Brazil fo state that there Is NO MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!” which message you knew to be false and posted for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order in Nigeria, posing a threat fo fife. or causing such message to be sent and thereby committed the offence of Cyberstalking contrary fo Section 241(b) and 24(2) (a), (b), and (c) of the. Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention) (Amendment) Aci, 2024 and punishable under the some section. 

    However, Sowore pleaded not guilty to the two count charges when read to him. 

    Read Also: Release Sowore’s passport now, Hashim urges Tinubu

    Attempt to begin trial was however stalled due to complaints by Sowore’s lawyer, Abubakar Marshall that the names of the witnesses and their particulars were not attached to the proof of evidence as required by law. 

    He claimed that the refusal to name the witnesses and disclosed their identities violated section 36 of the 1999 which compels fair hearing in any matter of the nature. 

    The Judge ordered Akinlolu Kehinde SAN to comply with the provisions of the law by listing names of the witnesses and their particulars and to also supply the defendant with necessary documents that would aid his preparation for defense. 

    The summary of the charge is that the defendant is standing trial on a two (2) count charge of cyberstalking contrary to Section.24(1) (b) and 24(2) (a), (b), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention and) Amendment) Act, 2024. 

    The prosecution alleges that the Defendant knowingly and intentionally sent messages he inew to be n false through his official “X” (formerly Twitter) and Facebook handles, wherein he wee -* published the statement: “This criminal @oflicialABAT actually went to Brazil to state thal there is NO MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to shamelessly lie’ 

    The prosecution contends that by referring to the President and Commander in chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, His Excellency, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR. as a “criminal,” the Defendant published a false statement for the purpose of causing  breakdown of law and order, posing threat to or causing such message to be sent. 

    The charges are punishable with a fine of a minimum of N15m or five years imprisonment.

  • Release Sowore’s passport now, Hashim urges Tinubu

    Release Sowore’s passport now, Hashim urges Tinubu

    • ‘Nigeria worth fighting for’

    Former presidential candidate and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chieftain, Dr. Gbenga Hashim, has urged President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to order the release of the international passport of activist and former presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore.

    He described the continued seizure of Sowore’s passport as an abuse of power and a threat to democratic freedoms.

    Hashim spoke yesterday in Abuja while hosting Sowore during a meeting with PDP’s Chairmen in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    Read Also: INEC begins preparation for 2027, reaffirms commitment to electoral integrity

    The meeting was also attended by Hashim’s Chief of Staff, Mr. Kamaldeen Adebayo Sanni, and the National Coordinator of the Gbenga Hashim Solidarity Movement, Abdulrazaq Hamzat.

    Hashim recalled his shared pro-democracy struggles with Sowore, which dated back to 1989, when Sowore was one of his protégés.

    The PDP chieftain said the meeting was not a nostalgic exercise, but a reminder of the sacrifices that secured Nigeria’s democratic space.

    According to him, Sowore’s courage, consistency, and refusal to bow to intimidation have made him a symbol of principled resistance and a rallying point for young Nigerians demanding a new political order.

    “Nigeria is worth fighting for, and meaningful change is possible, no matter how difficult,” Hashim said.

    He condemned what he called the sustained persecution of Sowore for speaking truth to power, saying the continued seizure of his passport has effectively punished him without conviction and denied him the basic right to family life.

    Hashim warned that democracies collapse when dissent is criminalised, stressing that the protection of opposing voices is a non-negotiable pillar of democratic governance.

    The PDP chieftain urged President Tinubu to order the immediate release of Sowore’s passport in the interest of justice, the rule of law, and respect for fundamental human rights.

    During the meeting, Sowore reconnected with longtime comrades, as participants reflected on defining moments that shaped their lifelong commitment to democracy, civic courage, and accountable leadership.

  • Release Sowore’s passport now— Gbenga Hashim urges tinubu

    Release Sowore’s passport now— Gbenga Hashim urges tinubu

     …says Nigeria is worth fighting for

    Former presidential candidate and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chieftain, Dr. Gbenga Hashim, has urged President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to immediately order the release of the international passport of activist and former presidential candidate, Comrade Omoyele Sowore, describing its continued seizure as an abuse of power and a threat to democratic freedoms.

    Hashim made the call on Tuesday in Abuja while receiving Sowore, who paid him a courtesy visit during a meeting with PDP chairmen in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    The meeting was also attended by the Chief of Staff, Mr. Kamaldeen Adebayo Sanni, and the National Coordinator of the Gbenga Hashim Solidarity Movement, Abdulrazaq Hamzat.

    Speaking during the interaction, Hashim recalled their shared pro-democracy struggles dating back to 1989, when Sowore was one of his protégés.

    He said the meeting was not a nostalgic exercise, but a reminder of the sacrifices that secured Nigeria’s democratic space.

    According to Hashim, Sowore’s courage, consistency, and refusal to bow to intimidation have made him a symbol of principled resistance and a rallying point for young Nigerians demanding a new political order.

    Read Also: 2027: Kano support groups vow to support Gbenga Hashim’s presidential ambition, renew strategies

    “Nigeria is worth fighting for, and meaningful change is possible, no matter how difficult,” Hashim said.

    He condemned what he described as the sustained persecution of Sowore for speaking truth to power, noting that the continued seizure of his passport has effectively punished him without conviction and denied him the basic right to family life.

    Hashim warned that democracies collapse when dissent is criminalized, stressing that the protection of opposing voices is a non-negotiable pillar of democratic governance.

    He therefore called on President Tinubu to act decisively by ordering the immediate release of Sowore’s passport in the interest of justice, the rule of law, and respect for fundamental human rights.

    The meeting also provided an opportunity for Sowore to reconnect with longtime comrades, as participants reflected on defining moments that shaped their lifelong commitment to democracy, civic courage, and accountable leadership.

  • Court bars Sowore from making negative comments on national peace, security

    Court bars Sowore from making negative comments on national peace, security

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has barred politician and online publisher Omoyele Sowore from making further statements that are detrimental to the country’s peace and security.

    In a ruling yesterday, Justice Mohammed Umar threatened to revoke the bail granted Sowore should he ever make statements that could jeopardise the nation’s peace and security..

    In granting Sowore bail, Justice Umar held that he provided sufficient evidence, which enabled the court to exercise its discretion in granting him bail on self-recognition.

    Justice Umar said there was evidence that Sowore was once a presidential candidate in the country, and he had been earlier granted bail. Additionally, his international passport was being held by the court as part of the conditions attached to the bail granted him in another case.

    The ruling was on a bail application argued by his lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, shortly after Sowore was arraigned on a five-count charge, in which he is accused of defaming President Bola Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in his posts on X and Facebook.

    When the charge, being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS), was read to him, Sowore pleaded not guilty.

    Read Also: Summit rallies support for Nigeria’s MSMEs

    In the charge, Sowore, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC) in 2019, is accused of contravening the provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024 and the Criminal Code Act by calling President Bola Tinubu a criminal.

    The two other defendants listed in the charge, marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025, are X Incorp (formerly Twitter) and Meta (Facebook) Incorp.

    Earlier at the commencement of proceedings, lawyer to the prosecution, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN) informed the court that the business of the day was for the arraignment of the first defendant, who was already in the dock.

    However, Abubakar made frantic efforts to prevent his client’s arraignment and informed the court about a notice of preliminary objection filed the previous day by his client, challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the charge.

  • UPDATED: Court bars Sowore from making statements detrimental to national peace, security

    UPDATED: Court bars Sowore from making statements detrimental to national peace, security

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has barred politician and online publisher, Omoyele Sowore, from further making statements that are detrimental to the peace and security of the country.

    Justice Mohammed Umar, in a ruling on Tuesday, threatened to revoke the bail granted to Sowore should he ever make such statements.

    In granting Sowore bail, Justice Umar held that he provided sufficient evidence on which the court should exercise its discretion in granting him bail on self-recognition.

    Justice Umar said there was evidence that Sowore was once a presidential candidate in the country, he was earlier granted bail, and that his international passport was still being held by the court as part of the conditions attached to the bail earlier granted him in respect of another case.

    The ruling was on a bail application argued by his lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, shortly after Sowore was arraigned on a five-count charge, in which he is accused of defaming President Bola Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in his posts on X and Facebook.

    When the charge, being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS), was read to him, Sowore pleaded not guilty.

    In the charge, Sowore, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC) in 2019, is accused of contravening the provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024, and the Criminal Code Act by calling President Bola Tinubu a criminal

    The two other defendants listed in the charge, marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025, are X Incorp (formerly Twitter) and Meta (Facebook) Incorp.

    Earlier at the commencement of proceedings, lawyer to the prosecution, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), informed the court that the business of the day was for the arraignment of the first defendant, who was already in the dock.

    However, Abubakar made frantic efforts to prevent his client’s arraignment and informed the court about a notice of preliminary objection filed the previous day by his client, challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the charge.

    Abubakar urged the court to postpone proceedings to a later date to enable the prosecution, who he admitted served the preliminary objection 30 minutes before the court started sitting, file its response.

    He insisted that the court must first hear his client’s objection before an arraignment could take place.

    Kehinde faulted Abubakar’s position and argued that by the provision of Section

    396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), a defendant could only raise an objection to the validity of a charge after arraignment.

    He added that it is only after the defendant’s plea has been taken that the court can properly assume jurisdiction.

    Lawyers to X and Facebook – Christabel Ndeokwelu and Mofesomo Oyetibo (SAN), said they also have a preliminary objection, challenging the inclusion of their clients in the charge since no offences are alleged against them.

    Ndeokwelu and Oyetibo said they were not averse to the arraignment taking place on Tuesday to clear the road for the hearing of their objections.

    Ruling, Justice Umar overruled Abubakar and ordered that Sowore should be arraigned on the charge, to which he later pleaded not guilty when it was read to him by an official of the court.

    The judge has, however, adjourned till January 19 for further hearing.

    Counts in the charge read:

    *That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male on or about the 25th day of August, 2025, did use your official X handle page, @Yele Sowore, to send out a message/ tweet as: ‘This criminal @officialPBAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly,’ which you know the said message to be false but posted it for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order in the country, especially among individuals, who hold divergent views on the personality of the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 24 (1) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024.

    *That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult male on or about the 26th day of August, 2025, did use your official Facebook page, Omoyele Sowore, to send out a message/ post as: ‘This criminal @officialPBAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly,’ which you know the said message/post to be false, but posted it for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order in the country, especially among individuals who hold divergent views on the personality of the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 24 (1) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act, 2024.

    *That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male on or about the 25th day of August, 2025, using the instrumentality of X, via your official X account @Yele Sowore, did knowingly publish defamatory material on your online platform viz: ‘This criminal @officialPBAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly, against the personality and reputation of the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR), and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 375 of the Criminal Code Act.

    *That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male on or about the 26th day of August, 2025, using the instrumentality of Facebook, via your official Facebook account Omoyele Sowore, did knowingly publish defamatory material on your online platform viz: ‘This criminal @officialPBAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly, against the personality and reputation of the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR), and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 375 of the Criminal Code Act.

    *That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male on or about the 26th day of August, 2025 with intent to cause public fear and disturbance, published false information on your official X and Facebook accounts @Yele Sowore, respectively, against the personality and reputation of the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmed Tinubu (GCFR) and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 59 of the Criminal Code Act and punishable under the same Act.