Omoyele Sowore submitted a bail plea for the alleged cybercrime offenses, but the Federal High Court in Abuja postponed its decision until Thursday.
Following arguments for and against the request from Sowore’s attorney Marshall Abubakar and the prosecution attorney Uddy Jonathan, Justice Musa Liman delayed the court on Wednesday.
According to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), Sowore, a former presidential candidate and activist, was previously charged by the police with 16 amended counts for remarks he made on social media about Inspector-General I-G) of Police Kayode Egbetokun.
Sowore, the organizer of the #RevolutionNow Protest, was listed as the only defendant by the I-G in the amended accusation, which was stamped FHC/ABJ/CR/23/2025.
In count three, the police said that on December 20, 2024, Sowore called Egbetokun, “the illegal IG of Nigeria Police Force,” via his X handle.
Additionally, he was accused of posting an image of Egbetokun on his X handle along with the following caption: “Mediocrity, incompetence, corruption, a country run by characterless people cannot make progress.”
Additionally, the police said that Sowore threatened, “If we don’t act now, IGP Kayode Egbetokun will destroy the Nigeria police,” via his X handle.
However, Sowore entered a not guilty plea to each count, and the court paused the case to consider Abubakar’s bail request.
Abubakar moved the bail motion on self-recognition or on the most lenient terms until trial when the court reconvened.
Abubakar asserted that the court had the authority to grant bail and asked the court to do so in Sowore’s favor.
He maintained that there was no justification provided by the complainant for refusing the applicant bail.
He said that the police had acknowledged in their affidavit that Sowore was eligible to bail and had declared that it had given the petitioner bail.
He claimed that Sowore had promised to face trial and refrain from interfering with the prosecution’s witnesses.
Jonathan, who represented the I-G, objected to the bail request.
In a 25-paragraph counter-affidavit, the prosecution’s attorney asked the court to reject the bail request, stating that bail cannot be granted arbitrarily.
He claimed that the petitioner had not submitted any documentation to the court indicating his availability for the trial.
He pleaded with the court to either deny the application or release the applicant on bond with requirements that would force him to show up for his trial.
The judge postponed the case until Thursday for a decision after hearing the arguments of the attorneys.