By DAYO ADESULU
The Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected several documents tendered by the defence in the ongoing Sowore cybercrime trial, a case that has reignited national debate over free speech, corruption allegations, and the limits of political criticism in Nigeria.
Justice Mohammed Umar, presiding on Wednesday, ruled that the documents could not be properly admitted through the prosecution’s first witness, who had already told the court he was unaware of their contents. The ruling marked another tense moment in the trial of activist and publisher Omoyele Sowore, who is facing charges over a social media post critical of President Bola Tinubu.
Background of the Sowore Cybercrime Trial
Omoyele Sowore is standing trial on a two-count amended charge bordering on cyberstalking and cybercrime. The charges stem from a social media post he made on August 25, 2025, in which he described President Bola Tinubu as a “criminal.”
The post followed comments credited to President Tinubu during a visit to Brazil, where he reportedly declared that corruption in Nigeria had ended under his administration. Sowore’s remarks, prosecutors argue, crossed the line from political criticism into criminal cyberbullying.
Sowore has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Defence Attempts to Introduce Corruption-Related Reports
During cross-examination, defence counsel Marshal Abubakar attempted to tender a series of online publications and reports relating to alleged corruption cases within public institutions. These included reports of dismissals within the Department of State Services (DSS), actions by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), and prosecutions involving public officials.
According to Abubakar, the DSS dismissed 115 officers in 2025 over corruption-related offences. He also claimed that the EFCC dismissed 27 staff for fraud and misconduct, charged five state governors to court over corruption allegations, and arrested officials of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) in connection with an alleged N7.2 billion fraud.
The defence argued that these documents were central to Sowore’s case. Abubakar insisted they were meant to demonstrate that corruption had not ended in Nigeria, contrary to the claim attributed to the President, and that even anti-graft agencies were still battling internal corruption.
Prosecution Objects, Cites Evidence Act
However, the prosecution objected strongly to the attempt to tender the documents.
Lead prosecution counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), argued that the publications were irrelevant to the specific cyberstalking charge before the court. He also contended that the documents failed to meet the requirements of Section 84 of the Evidence Act, which governs the admissibility of electronic and computer-generated evidence.
Kehinde told the court that the documents were neither produced by the prosecution witness nor properly linked to his testimony. He urged Justice Umar to reject them in their entirety.
Court Ruling: Documents Marked Rejected
In his ruling, Justice Umar agreed with the prosecution. The judge held that documents could not be tendered through a witness who had already stated under oath that he was unaware of their contents.
Consequently, the court marked the documents as rejected.
The ruling underscored the court’s position on strict compliance with evidentiary rules, particularly in cases involving electronic publications and online reports.
Tinubu’s Past Statements Also Rejected
The defence also sought to tender additional documents allegedly containing past statements attributed to President Tinubu against former Presidents Goodluck Jonathan and Olusegun Obasanjo, as well as reports on Nigeria’s corruption ranking by Transparency International.
Abubakar argued that Tinubu, while in Lagos in 2011, had described then-President Jonathan as a “drunkard and sinking fisherman,” branding his administration as “corrupt and shameless.” He further claimed that Tinubu had referred to former President Obasanjo as “expired meat.”
When questioned, the DSS witness said he was not aware of those statements.
Once again, the prosecution objected, arguing that the documents were irrelevant and that the person who deposed to them was not present in court to testify. Justice Umar upheld the objection and rejected the documents.
DSS Witness Distances Self From Corruption Claims
In his testimony, the DSS witness further stated that he was unaware of Nigeria’s ranking on the global corruption index. He also denied knowledge of alleged social media posts by political figures such as Femi Fani-Kayode and Reno Omokri, which accused President Tinubu of corruption, drug trafficking, and alleged involvement in the murder of former Lagos governorship candidate, Funsho Williams.
The responses further weakened the defence’s attempt to introduce broader political and corruption narratives into the trial through that particular witness.
Case Adjourned to March 5, 2026
At the close of proceedings, defence counsel applied for an adjournment to continue the cross-examination of the witness. Justice Umar granted the request and adjourned the Sowore cybercrime trial until March 5, 2026.
As the case progresses, it continues to draw attention from civil society groups, legal analysts, and political observers who see it as a critical test of Nigeria’s cybercrime laws, press freedom, and the boundaries of dissent in a democratic society.
Whether the court will eventually allow broader evidence touching on corruption narratives remains to be seen. For now, the focus remains squarely on procedural compliance and the narrow legal questions before the court.
Hashtags:
#SoworeCybercrimeTrial #OmoyeleSowore #FederalHighCourt #NigeriaPolitics #CybercrimeLaw #FreeSpeech #Tinubu #CourtRuling
