Court Dismisses Sowore's Evidence in Cyberstalking Case Against Tinubu

Justice Mohammed Garba Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, rejected two sets of documents tendered by politician and online publisher, Omoyele Sowore, in his ongoing cyberstalking trial.

Sowore is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS) for allegedly making false claims against President Bola Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in posts on his X (formerly Twitter) handle and Facebook accounts.

In the first ruling, Justice Umar declined an oral application by Sowore’s lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, seeking to tender a set of documents comprising printouts of various publications.

The publications included media reports on the DSS’s dismissal of 115 officials for misconduct, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charging five former governors with corruption, the EFCC’s dismissal of 27 officials over fraud and misconduct, and the EFCC’s arrest of some former Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) staff over an alleged N7.2 billion fraud.

In his ruling, Justice Umar agreed with the prosecuting counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), that the appropriate time for the defendant to tender such documents would be during the conduct of his defence.

The judge held that since the first prosecution witness (PW1), being cross-examined by Abubakar, stated that he had no knowledge of the publications, the documents could not be tendered through him.

“You cannot tender a document through a witness who said he does not know anything about it. The document is marked as rejected,” Justice Umar ruled.

In the second ruling, the judge rejected another set of documents consisting of printouts of publications which Abubakar claimed showed that President Tinubu, in 2011, referred to then President Goodluck Jonathan as a drunkard and a sinking fisherman, and described former President Olusegun Obasanjo as “expired meat.”

Justice Umar marked the documents rejected for the same reason given in rejecting the first set.

The judge also frowned at a report by the prosecuting counsel that a member of the defence team had livestreamed previous proceedings in the case and urged the court to order an investigation to identify the person responsible.

Although Abubakar denied that any member of the defence team was involved and suggested that it could have been done by the DSS or individuals within the Presidency, the judge said such conduct amounted to contempt of court.

Abubakar urged the court to caution against a repeat of the incident rather than order an investigation.

Justice Umar said it would be easy to identify the person behind the act and that he could direct security agencies to investigate the matter, describing it as serious.

Although the judge promised to address the issue at the end of the day’s proceedings, he remained silent on it while adjourning the case.

While being cross-examined, PW2, Cyril Nosike, an official of the DSS, said that at the time Sowore made the post for which he is being prosecuted, President Tinubu’s official X handle was @officialABAT.

The witness rejected Abubakar’s suggestion that the President’s official X handle is @PBAT.

Nosike said he did not tender any court judgment to show that corruption had ended in Nigeria.

When asked whether there is corruption in Nigeria, the witness said he is not a politician and could not comment, adding: “I am not here to give my opinion, but to state the facts.”

He faulted Abubakar’s claim that the DSS dismissed 115 officials for corruption, explaining that they were dismissed after internal investigations and not specifically for corruption.

The witness denied knowing that in 2025 the EFCC charged five former governors to court for corruption, arrested former NNPCL staff over an alleged N7.2 billion fraud, or dismissed 27 officers for fraud and misconduct.

On global corruption rankings, the witness said he was not aware of any such rankings or the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index.

He also said he was unaware that Nigeria is ranked 140 out of 180 countries in the global corruption index.

Asked whether he knew that President Tinubu was a major opposition figure in 2011, the witness said he did not know.

He also said he was not aware that Tinubu had, in 2011, described then President Jonathan as corrupt and shameless, or referred to him as a drunkard and a sinking fisherman.

On former President Olusegun Obasanjo, Nosike said he knew him but was not aware that Tinubu had called Obasanjo “expired meat.”

The witness said he would be surprised if shown documents indicating that Tinubu made such statements about the two former presidents.

When asked if he knew Femi Fani-Kayode, now an ambassador-designate, the witness said yes, but could not recall that Fani-Kayode was a vocal critic of the President before his nomination.

Nosike denied knowledge of Abubakar’s claim that Fani-Kayode made a social media post alleging that Tinubu had knowledge of the death of Funso Williams, a former governorship candidate in Lagos State.

He said he was not aware that the DSS screened Fani-Kayode as an ambassador-designate, as it did not fall within his schedule.

Nosike also said he could not recall that Funso Williams was murdered in Lagos while Tinubu was governor of the state.

He admitted knowing Chief Reno Omokri and confirmed that Omokri is an ambassador-designate appointed by the current administration.

The witness said he was not aware of Omokri’s social media posts alleging that Tinubu had knowledge of Williams’ murder, nor had he come across any videos in which Omokri made such claims.

He also said he was not aware that Omokri staged a protest against President Tinubu in London, alleging involvement in drug trafficking and the murder of Funso Williams.

After one hour and 40 minutes of cross-examination, Justice Umar asked Abubakar when he intended to conclude, noting that the witness had already been cross-examined for two days.

Abubakar requested one more day, claiming he still had important questions and documents to confront the witness with.

Responding, Kehinde recalled that Abubakar had previously requested one additional hour but had exceeded that time and was still not done.

Kehinde said he would leave it to the court to decide whether to grant the adjournment.

In his ruling, Justice Umar noted that it was the second day of cross-examination of PW1 and that despite earlier assurances, the defence had exceeded the allotted time.

However, he granted the adjournment in the interest of fairness, stating: “In the spirit of fairness, I will adjourn for the last time for cross-examination.”

The case was adjourned to March 5 for further cross-examination.