By Uche Amunike
The Department of State Services (DSS) re-arraigned former presidential candidate and activist, Omoyele Sowore, before an Abuja Federal High Court over an alleged Anti-Tinubu post on social media, even as the federal government formally dropped charges against Meta Platforms Incorporated and X Corporation.
This development occured after the prosecution’s decision to amend the charge and make Omoyele Sowore the sole defendant in the cybercrime case.
Sowore was initially arraigned on December 2, 2025 in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025, alongside Meta Platforms Incorporated and X Corporation formerly known as Twitter.
However, when the hearing was resumed before Justice Umar on Monday, the lead prosecution counsel , Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN) informed the court that an amended charge filed on December 5, 2025 was ready to be read with no objection from the defense.
Subsequently, the prosecution withdrew the earlier charge and formally applied for the names of the 2nd and 3rd defendants, Meta Platforms Incorporated and X Corporation, to be struck out of the case.
The application was granted by Justice Umar, who struck out both companies from the charge.
According to the amended charge, Omoyele Sowore is accused of knowingly sending a message on or about August 25, 2025 through his verified X handle, which the prosecution alleges was false and capable of causing a breakdown of law and order.
According to the charge, Omoyele Sowore posted: ‘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!’
The prosecution alleged that the post amounted to cyberstalking, contrary to Sections 24(1)(b) and 24(2)(a), (b), and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act 2024.
Omoyele Sowore, however pleaded Not Guilty after the amended charge was read to him.
The prosecution applied to proceed with trial and sought to call its first witness. The defense council, Marshal Abubakar, however opposed this move, with the argument that the prosecution was not ready for trial, contending that the amended charge was defective for failing to disclose the identity of any prosecution witness or attached witness statements.
Relying on section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, the defense counsel stated that the omission violated Omoyele Sowore’s right to fair hearing, maintaining that the defense could not properly prepare without knowing the witnesses and evidence to be relied upon.
‘The witness sought to be called is unknown to the defense and indeed unknown to the court’, Abubakar reiterated.
In his response, kehinde dismissed the objection as speculative, with the argument that section 36(6) of the constitution does not require the prosecution to disclose the identity of a witness before calling him to testify.
He further stated that the defense was free to apply for an adjournment to enable cross examination, explaining that the prosecution intended to call only one witness who was already present in court.
After listening to arguments from both sides, Justice Umar directed the prosecution to provide the defense with the witness statement and adjourned the matter to Thursday, January 22, 2026 for definite hearing.
