Judiciary
…urges DSS to drop the prosecution of Sowere
EVEN as the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, ordered the immediate remand of human rights activist and African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, at the Kuje Correctional Centre, the HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA) has condemned the action of the court to revoke his bail saying the entire legal episode paints Nigeria graphically as a primitive enclave whereby the rule by brute force is applied to quash freedoms of expression and speech.
Media report indicate that the activist, Sowore will remain in custody until Wednesday, June 24, 2026, when legal proceedings are scheduled to resume. But HURIWA has for the umpteenth time, asked the Department of State Services (DSS) to drop the charges slammed on Sowere because in the perception of HURIWA, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has all the communication and information machineries and manpower at the disposal of the President to counter the alleged unprintable social media post that was made by Sowere which precipitated his current legal ordeal.
HURIWA recalled that Sowore’s detention stems from a two-count cybercrime charge filed by the Department of State Services (DSS), which accuses Sowore of cyberstalking and criminal defamation after he labeled President Bola Tinubu a “criminal” in an August 2025 social media post.
In August 2025, Sowore posts on X and Facebook, calling President Tinubu a “criminal” over statements made during a trip to Brazil.
Sowere thereafter rebuffed DSS demands to delete the posts, citing free speech.
In May 2026, Justice Mohammed Umar rejected Sowore’s application to drop the charges. The judge ruled that the DSS established a prima facie case, legally requiring Sowore to open his defense.
Earlier in June 5, following a judicial directive for daily trial hearings, Sowore’s legal team withdraws from the case.
Citing the “humiliation” his lawyers faced, Sowore opts to represent himself and files a motion accusing the judge of bias.
Meanwhile, on June 16, 2026, after Sowore fails to appear for a scheduled defense continuation, the prosecution labels it a “delay tactic”.
Justice Umar revokes his self-recognition bail and issues a bench warrant for his arrest.
HURIWA however thinks that the decision of the judge of the Federal High Court was hasty, harsh and untenable considering that it has emerged that Sowere did send a letter to the honorable judge through the Chief Registrar explaining his reason that he would not be in the court due to some travelling constraints. HURIWA said as a civil rights advocacy group, it is aware that several judges and justices of the courts of competent jurisdiction, have even on their own, granted adjournments when the prosecution is not available even without a written or oral reasons. “This Honourable judge, could have granted Sowere just one adjournment and if he fails to honour the rescheduled proceeding, then the judge could exercise his authority regarding the bail. We are aware that even when persons accused of large scale corruption and economic crimes asked for adjournments, most judges do oblige them their prayers. So, why is Sowore being discriminated against? Why the hurry to revoke his bail which his lordship had willingly granted?”
HURIWA recalled that media report has it that on June 22, 2026 (today), Justice Umar officially dismisses Sowore’s motion seeking his disqualification over alleged bias.
Following the arrest order, the court orders Sowore to be remanded at Kuje Correctional centre.
HURIWA recalled that the DSS’s case rests on provisions within Section 24 of the amended Cybercrimes Act, 2024.
The prosecution argues that Sowore’s online rhetoric was knowingly false and intentionally deployed to incite public disorder. Sowore maintains a plea of “not guilty”.
While the prosecution argued that Sowore’s recent absence from court was a deliberate obstruction, Sowore publicly countered that he had arrived at court for the previous scheduled sitting on June 15, only for the judge to be absent without notice.
Sowore had filed a formal letter informing the registry of his subsequent travel, which the court ultimately bypassed when issuing the arrest warrant the following day.
HURIWA has also condemned some toxic sections of the Cybercrime Act as obstacles to media freedoms and as impediments to the full enjoyment of the constitutionally recognised fundamental human rights as enshrined in chapter 4 of the Nigerian Constitution of 1999 (as amended).
“We in HURIWA recognise and condemns the presence of many provisions of the Cybercrimes Act that are vague and are simply, overbroad provisions. It is a fact that Section 24 and Section 58 use undefined terms like “cyberstalking”, “harassment”, “insult”, “annoyance”, “false information”, and “breakdown of law and order”. The ECOWAS Court of Justice ruled in March 2022 that the original Section 24 was “arbitrary, vague and repressive” and violated Article 9 of the African Charter + Article 19 of the ICCPR. Despite the 2024 amendment narrowing Section 24, SERAP and the National Human Rights Commission still argue the language remains vague and inconsistent with Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution. This creates legal uncertainty and risks arbitrary enforcement.
“HURIWA views actions of some prominent citizens and politicians using the Cybercrimes Act As the weaponization against journalists, activists, and dissent. The Cybercrimes Act is increasingly used to suppress criticism rather than combat cyber fraud. Heads of Mission from the US, UK, Canada, Finland, Norway, and the EU publicly warned that misuse of the Act threatens freedom of expression and Nigeria’s digital economy. Documented cases include charges against author Dele Farotimi for alleging judicial corruption, and arrests of journalists Daniel Ojukwu and Adejuwon Soyinka under cyberstalking provisions. Freedom House noted a decline in internet freedom in 2023-2024 linked to arbitrary arrests of bloggers post-amendment.”
Comrade Emmanuel Nnadozie Onwubiko conveys the position of the HUMAN RIGHTS WRITERS ASSOCIATION OF NIGERIA (HURIWA) that the charges against Mr. Sowere be dropped just as the Rights group said since the Nigerian president disagrees with the position of Sowere as disclosed in the now contentious post by Sowere, then his media advisers are professionally equipped enough to intellectually counter Sowore’s assessment of the current President just as the Rights group particularly asked the DSS to focus on the job of catching and prosecution of terrorists which the DSS under the current Director General has demonstrated some levels of successes so far.
A.I
June 22, 2026
Tags: HURIWA Omoyele Sowore