Former presidential candidate and human rights activist, Omoyele Sowore, has accused the Department of State Services (DSS) of abusing its powers by prosecuting what he described as a baseless and politically motivated cybercrime case, insisting that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has never personally denied or complained about the allegations attributed to him.
Sowore made the statement on Monday while addressing journalists after proceedings at the Federal High Court, where the federal government amended charges earlier filed against him. He revealed that the case suffered a major setback after government lawyers admitted in open court that they were not briefed by the President to initiate the prosecution.
According to Sowore, the Cybercrimes Act is explicit that only the individual who claims to have been harassed or defamed can file a complaint, a condition he said was completely absent in the current case.
“What came out clearly in court today is that the President never complained to anyone,” Sowore said. “The lawyers told the court they were not briefed by him. That alone ends the matter.”
He explained that this was not the first time he had faced similar charges, recalling previous cybercrime cases filed under the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, which were eventually withdrawn or dismissed by the courts.
“One of the core requirements of the law is that the alleged victim must complain. In 2019, we defeated a similar case because it could not be established that Buhari made any such complaint,” he stated.
Sowore disclosed that during the court session, the trial judge queried the prosecution on who initiated the case, especially as the government failed to disclose the identity of its only witness or provide the defence with advance details of the alleged testimony.
“The judge said even if the witness were an ‘evil spirit,’ the defence still has a right to know what evidence is coming,” Sowore noted.
Following objections by the defence, the court adjourned the case after it emerged that the prosecution failed to comply with constitutional provisions on fair hearing, including the requirement to frontload evidence and list witnesses.
Sowore accused the DSS of abandoning its constitutional duty of intelligence gathering in favour of targeting government critics.
“These are busy bodies at the DSS who should be focused on insecurity and terrorism,” he said. “Instead, they are dabbling in private affairs and trying to please political power.”
He also lamented the personal toll of the case, revealing that his passport had been seized for over a year, restricting his movement, while stressing that his situation reflected a broader assault on citizens’ rights.
“I am not more important than the millions of Nigerians trapped in this country,” Sowore said. “This is about the right to question government and demand accountability.”
Members of Sowore’s legal team further criticised the prosecution, stating that no witness was listed in the proof of evidence and that the defence was not served with the allegations ahead of time, in violation of constitutional safeguards.
They argued that the DSS had exceeded its mandate by pursuing what should be a private defamation claim, particularly when the alleged victim had neither denied the claims nor petitioned any security agency.
Sowore concluded by calling on the federal government to retrace its steps and focus on protecting lives and property rather than expending public funds on cases he described as frivolous.
