Share!
The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the arrest of activist and presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), Omoyele Sowore, following his failure to attend his trial.
Sowore was billed to open his defence to a two-count cybercrime charge the Department of State Services (DSS) filed against him for calling President Bola Tinubu a “criminal” in a social media post.
The defendant opted to represent himself before the court after his legal team withdrew from the case.
However, at the resumed proceedings on Tuesday, he failed to appear before the court, even though he sent a letter explaining that he had travelled to Lagos in search of lawyers to defend him.
Following an application from the DSS, Justice Mohammed Umar revoked the bail that had been earlier granted to the defendant and issued a warrant for his arrest.
Sowore had earlier asked the trial judge to recuse himself from the trial and remit the case file to the chief judge for reassignment to another judge.
In the application, anchored on Section 36(1)(5)(6) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, Sowore accused Justice Umar of bias, referencing an incident where his lawyer was ordered to kneel before the court.
Sowore said his lawyers had been scared off by the court’s decision to hear the case on a day-to-day basis, as well as by what he described as the judge’s high-handedness.
“My lawyers indicated to me that they are afraid to appear before you and will no longer appear because of the humiliation they suffered before this court.
“Pending the time I am able to reconstitute a new legal team, I shall be representing myself before your lordship,” he added.
Sowore had, on December 2, 2025, when he was arraigned in the charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025, pleaded not guilty.
The charges allege offences under Sections 24(1)(b) and 24(2)(a), (b), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.
The posts, dated August 25, 2025, were made in response to President Tinubu’s claim in Brazil that his administration had ended corruption in Nigeria.
Angered by the posts, the DSS demanded that X Inc. (formerly Twitter) and Meta Platforms Inc. ban Sowore’s accounts and remove the posts.
The security agency also wrote to Sowore, asking him to delete the posts from all platforms.
Non-compliance with the request led to the charges.
The prosecution claims the defamatory posts were intended to cause a breakdown of law and order and to tarnish the president’s reputation.
Exhibits include printouts of the posts and DSS letters.
X Inc. and Meta were initially co-defendants but were delisted in the amended charge, which states the following:
Discover more
News article database
Digital news archive
Business news report
Top stories digest
Sports news updates
“That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult male, on or about August 25, 2025, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, knowingly or intentionally sent a message by means of a computer system or network—to wit, your official X (formerly Twitter) handle @YeleSowore—stating, ‘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!’ – a message you knew to be false and posted to cause a breakdown of law and order in Nigeria, posing a threat to life, thereby committing cyberstalking contrary to Sections 24(1)(b) and 24(2)(a), (b), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, punishable under the same section.
“That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult male, on or about August 25, 2025, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, knowingly or intentionally sent a message by means of a computer system or network—to wit, your official Facebook handle @YeleSowore—stating, ‘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 to cause a breakdown of law and order in Nigeria, posing a threat to life, thereby committing cyberstalking contrary to Sections 24(1)(b) and 24(2)(a), (b), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, punishable under the same section.”
Vanguard
No related posts.
