Court threatens to foreclose Sowore’s defence in cyberbullying trial

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday threatened to foreclose Sahara Reporters publisher Omoyele Sowore’s defence in the ongoing trial over alleged defamation.

The State Security Service (SSS) is prosecuting Mr Sowore, the African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate for the upcoming 2027 elections, on cyberbullying charges for calling President Bola Tinubu a criminal in last year’s social media posts.

Mr Sowore, who will be running against Mr Tinubu’s second term bid in the 2027 election, presented widely known lawyer Deji Adeyanju as his first witness when he opened his defence on 6 July.

Justice Mohammed Umar warned of the possibility of cutting short Mr Sowore’s defence following an oral application by the prosecution lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

The prosecution lawyer was spurred to make the call after Mr Sowore sought an adjournment of Thursday’s proceedings over his lead defence counsel’s absence.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that, though Mr Sowore was in court, none of his lawyers was present.

“Where is your legal team?” Justice Umar asked.

Responding, Mr Sowore said, ”Unfortunately, my lead counsel, Mr Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, travelled to the UK with the knowledge of the court.

“Olumide-Fusika advised me to inform the court that he will not be available for today’s hearing and that he will like to handle this case because he is a skillful lawyer.”

He said besides, the junior lawyer, Reuben Adakole, was in another jurisdiction.

“I think the business of today is continuation of defence. That is my first submission my lord,” he said.

The judge then asked Mr Sowore what he wanted.

“Do you want to proceed?” Justice Umar asked.

Responding, Mr Sowore said that because it was a serious case, he would ask for an adjournment.

“I will urge your lordship to adjourn the matter because it is a serious case and I will need lawyer to defend me,” he said.

The defendant also begged the court to allow him make another application.

But the judge told Mr Sowore that applying to make another application other than seeking an adjournment, would mean he had decided to represent himself in court.

“If you want to take up the case let us know.

“If you have any application to make, it means you are planning to defend yourself.

“If you are seeking an adjournment that your counsel is not in court, that will be considered after hearing from the prosecution.

“But if you are making an application, it means you are telling this court that you are taking over the defence on your own,” the judge said.

In his response, the prosecution lawyer said Mr Sowore’s application for adjournment was his 11th so far in the course of the trial.

“With respect, this matter came up on July 13, 2027, and the defence counsel made an application for adjournment and the court adjourned to today because of the fact that their next set of witnesses are subpeaned witnesses and your lordship signed the subpeana.

“This same excuse was given that the lead counsel was absent at the last adjourned date and this court said that the absence of lead counsel cannot stop this proceeding,” Mr Kehinde said.

The prosecution lawyer also argued that a subsisting court order required the trial to proceed day-to-day.

He said Thursday’s application made it 11 times the defence would be making such a request, contrary to the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.

The senior lawyer submitted that it was crystal clear that Mr Sowore was not ready to proceed with his defence.

He, therefore, applied that his defence should be foreclosed.

“I urge your lordship, in the interest of justice which is a three-way traffic: justice for the prosecution, the defence and the society, to foreclose the defence and made a consequential order accordingly,” he said.

Ruling, Justice Umar said he will give Sowore the last opportunity in the interest of fair hearing.

“I have heard the application of the defendant, seeking for adjournment of the case on the basis that his lead counsel was not in court.

“The defendant cleary stated that this is a serious matter of which the lead counsel needs to give serious attention to same.

“I equally listened to counsel to the prosecution that this is the 11th adjournments and that the defendant’s defence should be foreclosed.

“Fair hearing demands that all parties be heard and the defendant presents his defrnce before court,” he said.

The judge said although the court cannot force the defendant to defend himself, he would grant Mr Sowore’s application for adjournment.

However, the judge warned that he might be forced to foreclose Mr Sowore’s defence if he fails to continue presenting his case at the next sitting.

The judge adjourned the matter until 22 July for definite continuation of defence.

Sowore seeks release of his passport

However, shortly after the ruling, Mr Sowore indicated his interest in addressing the court and the judge granted him leave.

The defendant therefore applied for his passport to be submitted at the United States embassy in order to address a family matter.

“I want to bring it to your lordship’s attention a various serious issues.

But Justice Umar directed him to file a formal application in that regard and for the prosecution to also respond accordingly before his decision is made.

Backstory

The SSS filed the cybercrime charges against Mr Sowore over his X and Facebook posts last year in which he referred to President Tinubu as “a criminal.”

The prosecution closed its case in March after calling its sole witness.

On 8 May, Mr Umar dismissed Mr Sowore’s no-case submission and directed him to open his defence.

Mr Sowore, who at one point represented himself after his legal team withdrew from the case, subsequently filed an application asking the judge to withdraw from the trial due to alleged bias.

The judge fixed 15 June for ruling on the application. However, the court did not sit on that date despite Mr Sowore’s appearance.

According to the defence, Mr Sowore later informed court officials that he would travel to Lagos and requested that any new hearing date be fixed in July.

However, the judge set the hearing for 16 June. When Mr Sowore failed to appear, the court revoked his bail and issued a bench warrant for his arrest. Mr Sowore was later arrested, and his lawyers subsequently filed an application challenging the revocation of his bail.

On 30 June, while ruling on the application, which the prosecution opposed, Judge Umar granted Mr Sowore fresh bail in the sum of N200 million with two sureties.

He subsequently released Mr Sowore to his lawyers and adjourned the case until Monday, 6 July (today), for him to open his defence.

On 6 July, Mr Sowore opened his defence, calling Mr Adeyanju as his first witness.

In his testimony, Mr Adeyanju, a lawyer widely known for his public affairs commentaries, defended Mr Sowore’s remark about Mr Tinubu.

He said Mr Tinubu had publicly stated that citizens had the right to criticise and “even insult him” as part of democratic governance.

He also told the court that the president urged the judiciary “not to allow itself to become an instrument of oppression” against government critics.

(NAN)