Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday dismissed a no‑case submission filed by activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore, ruling that the Department of State Services has established a prima facie case linking him to cyberbullying of President Bola Tinubu. Justice Mohammed Garba Umar consequently ordered Sowore to enter his defence, rejecting the activist’s argument that the prosecution failed to present credible evidence. The trial is set to continue on May 19, when Sowore will be required to respond to a two‑count charge filed under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.
Justice Umar delivered the ruling on Friday, May 8, 2026, after both parties had adopted their final written addresses. The judge upheld the position of the prosecution, led by Mr Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, who argued that the DSS had presented sufficient evidence at this stage of the trial to warrant a full defence. The court noted that the prosecution had called a witness, a DSS operative, who tendered printouts of Sowore’s social media posts, a flash drive containing video clips, and a certificate of compliance, among other exhibits. Justice Umar explained that at the stage of a no‑case submission, the court is only required to consider the weight of the evidence already adduced, not the credibility of witnesses.
The charge stems from a post Sowore made on his X (formerly Twitter) handle on August 25, 2025. In the post, Sowore referred to President Tinubu as a “criminal” while reacting to the president’s statement during a visit to Brazil that there was “no more corruption” under his administration. The DSS, through its counsel, argued that the post was not only defamatory but also capable of causing a breakdown of law and order and tarnishing the president’s reputation. The prosecution urged the court to dismiss Sowore’s no‑case submission and compel him to speak to the evidence already on record.
Sowore, through his lead counsel Mr Marshall Abubakar, had filed the no‑case submission on April 21, 2026, asking the court to discharge and acquit him. His lawyer contended that the prosecution had failed to call vital witnesses and had not established any credible link between Sowore and the alleged offences. Abubakar argued that the evidence presented was insufficient to meet the threshold of a prima facie case and that the charge was frivolous. However, Justice Umar rejected those arguments, ruling that the DSS had successfully connected the activist to the allegations through the exhibits and testimony of its lone witness.
In his ruling, the judge held that terminating the matter at this stage would not serve the interest of justice. He noted that the evidence before the court showed that Sowore used his social media handle to make the post forming the basis of the charge. The judge stressed that the court had the duty to allow the case to proceed to the defence stage, where Sowore would have the opportunity to explain his actions and challenge the prosecution’s case.
Following the ruling, the prosecution invoked Section 396(6) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) and urged the court to direct Sowore to commence his defence immediately. Justice Umar agreed and fixed May 19, 2026, for the defence to open its case. The court also noted that the defence team had reserved its objections to some exhibits until the stage of final written addresses.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, Sowore’s legal team made an oral application requesting Justice Umar to recuse himself and return the case file to the Chief Judge for reassignment. The defence cited a lack of confidence in the judge’s ability to preside objectively. The judge directed them to file a formal application, noting that the request could not be entertained orally. It remains unclear whether a formal recusal motion will be filed before the May 19 hearing.
The two‑count charge against Sowore, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025, accuses him of committing an offence under Sections 24(1)(b) and 24(2)(a), (b), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024. The first count alleges that Sowore intentionally sent a message via his X handle in which he called President Tinubu a “criminal”, knowing the statement to be false, and which was likely to cause a breakdown of law and order. The second count encompasses similar allegations, also centred on the same August 25, 2025 post.
The DSS had initially included X Inc. (formerly Twitter) and Meta Platforms Inc. as co‑defendants, but they were dropped from the amended charge filed on December 5, 2025. Sowore was re‑arraigned on the amended two‑count charge and pleaded not guilty. The prosecution closed its case after calling a single witness, a DSS operative named Cyril Nosike. During the trial, the court admitted in evidence screenshots of the posts, a flash drive containing video clips, and official letters from the DSS. The prosecution also tendered a certificate of compliance, which was admitted over a reserved objection from the defence.
The ruling has drawn mixed reactions from civil society groups and legal practitioners. Some human rights activists have expressed concern that the case could set a precedent for the criminalisation of political speech, while others have argued that the court merely affirmed that a prima facie case exists and that the judicial process must run its course. Sowore, a former presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), has remained defiant, insisting that his post was an expression of political opinion and not a threat to national security.
As the trial moves to the defence stage, all eyes will be on the Federal High Court in Abuja. Sowore will now have the burden of proving that his statement does not amount to an offence under the cybercrime law. The case has become a major test for the limits of free expression in Nigeria’s digital space, especially when the subject of criticism is the sitting president. Whatever the outcome, the legal battle is far from over, and the coming months will determine whether Sowore will be convicted, acquitted, or forced to navigate a prolonged courtroom struggle.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments