The ongoing legal proceedings between the Department of State Services (DSS) and Omoyele Sowore, presidential candidate of the African Action Congress in the 2023 general election, have evolved into a complex case that may establish an important precedent regarding freedom of speech and fundamental human rights in the context of digital communication. The issue originated
The ongoing legal proceedings between the Department of State Services (DSS) and Omoyele Sowore, presidential candidate of the African Action Congress in the 2023 general election, have evolved into a complex case that may establish an important precedent regarding freedom of speech and fundamental human rights in the context of digital communication.
The issue originated from a post made by the activist on August 25, 2025, on his official X account, in which he referred to President Bola Tinubu as a “criminal” in response to the President’s claim that his administration had ended corruption in Nigeria during a recent visit to Brazil. The post prompted the state security service to contact Mr. Sowore and request that the social media post be deleted.
The DSS gave Mr Sowore one week to remove the post, stating that it was “false, malicious, and inciting,” and indicated that failure to do so could lead to legal action to “protect national security and public order.” Additionally, Mr Sowore reported that he had been informed the DSS had contacted the management of X and Meta, the owners of the social media accounts he used, requesting the deletion of the post concerning the President.
After a one-week grace period for Mr Sowore, the DSS filed a five-count charge at the Federal High Court in Abuja against Sowore, Meta (Facebook), and X (formerly Twitter). The suit cites the Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act 2024 and the Criminal Code Act, alleging defamation, incitement, and dissemination of false information that could lead to public unrest.
The Director of Public Prosecutions at the Federal Ministry of Justice, M.B. Abubakar, together with four other DSS counsels—M.E. Ernest, U.B. Bulla, Dr. C.S. Eze, and E.G. Orubor—submitted court documents under suit number FHC/ABJ/CR/481/2025, dated September 16, 2025. The documents list the Federal Government as the complainant and Mr. Sowore, X Corps, and De Meta as defendants in the case.
Count one reads: “That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult, male on or about the 25th day of August, 2025, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did use your official X Handle page, @Yele Sowore, to send out a message/ tweet as: ‘THIS CRIMINAL @ OFFICIAL PBAT 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.”
Count two reads: “That you, Omoyele Sowore, adult male on or about the 26th day of August, 2025, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did use your official Facebook page, Omoyele Sowore, to send out a message/ post as: ‘THIS CRIMINAL @ OFFICIAL PBAT 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.”
Count three alleges that on August 25, 2025, Sowore defamed President Tinubu by calling him a “criminal” and accusing him of lying about ending corruption in Nigeria on his X (Twitter) account.
Count Four pertains to an allegation regarding Mr. Sowore’s post on his official Facebook page dated August 26, 2025, in which he is said to have repeated a statement concerning the President. Count Five alleges that on the same date, Mr. Sowore intentionally disseminated false information via both X and Facebook, with the purported aim of inciting public alarm and unrest, thereby impacting the reputation of President Tinubu.
Reacting to the suit, Mr Sowore, in his Facebook post, wrote, “The State Security Service, alias @OfficialDSSNG, today filed a 5-count charge at the Federal High Court in Abuja against ‘X’ (formerly Twitter, Facebook, and myself. They claimed that because I called Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu a criminal, I have somehow committed a set of ‘novel’ offences they invented and spread across five counts. “It is hard to believe there’s anyone sensible left in these offices that should be making Nigeria work. Regardless, I will be present whenever this case is assigned for trial. #RevolutionNow.”
While the DSS charges against him were still pending, the human rights activist responded by filing a countersuit against the DSS, as well as DeMeta (owners of Facebook) and X Corp. (formerly Twitter), alleging attempts to censor his social media posts critical of President Bola Tinubu.
In a statement released by his legal team on Tuesday and signed by Tope Temokun, a fundamental rights suit was filed against the state security. The suit contests actions described as censorship and asserts that it concerns the individual’s freedom of speech, which he alleges the DSS intends to restrict.
Sowore’s legal team argued that censorship of political criticism is alien to the democratic system that Nigeria is practising and therefore should not be allowed to stand. Citing Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression, he further maintained, “These suits were filed to challenge the unconstitutional censorship initiated by the DSS/SSS against Sowore’s accounts maintained with Meta and X,” Temokun said in a statement on Tuesday.
“This is about the survival of free speech in Nigeria. If state agencies can dictate to global platforms who may speak and what may be said, then no Nigerian is safe; their voices will be silenced at the whim of those in power.”
“No security agency, no matter how powerful, can suspend or delete those rights,” he said. “Meta and X must also understand this: when they bow to unlawful censorship demands, they become complicit in the suppression of liberty. They cannot hide behind neutrality while authoritarianism is exported onto their platforms.”
“We call on all lovers of freedom, journalists, human rights defenders, and the Nigerian people to stand firm. Today it is Sowore; tomorrow it may be you,” the statement said. “This struggle is not about personalities. It is about principle. And we shall resist every attempt to turn Nigeria into a digital dictatorship.”
Implications of Legal Actions and Counterclaims
The ongoing legal proceedings between Sowore and the DSS have prompted discussions about the potential impact on fundamental human rights, specifically freedom of expression and speech in the country. A court ruling in favour of the DSS charges could set a precedent affecting the regulation of speech through digital media.
This could also raise the prosecution of dissent against the government, potentially intimidating journalists, activists, and civil society groups.
If Mr Sowore wins his counter-suit, it may reinforce constitutional rights, limit the DSS’s authority, and bolster legal protection for online free speech.
Regardless of the outcome, the decision will establish a precedent that affects not only Sowore and DSS but also presents considerations for the broader legal system in the country.
Lawyer Comments on Sowore’s Actions
Lawyer Bolaji Oluwatosin M told NDR that the AAC’s 2023 presidential candidate is fighting a case that could set a national precedent for basic human rights.
“What Sowore is doing is bigger than himself. He is standing against bad laws, reckless governance, and the misuse of state power. The DSS is not acting in the interest of justice or our country’s progress; they are simply proving their loyalty to a government that fears dissent more than it fears poverty, insecurity, or corruption.
“This is not just about one man in court; it is about whether Nigerians will continue to be silenced or whether we will demand a nation where justice serves the people, not power. The question is no longer about Sowore alone; it is about all of us, and if we do not speak now; when will we?”, he said.
