Human rights advocate and former presidential contender, Omoyele Sowore, has strongly criticised the Department of State Services (DSS) for pursuing a case against an X (formerly Twitter) account he insists has no connection to President Bola Tinubu.
Speaking on Wednesday, he described the agency’s actions as misinformed and embarrassing, pointing out that the account under scrutiny was created years before Tinubu assumed the presidency.
According to him, the account in question was established in 2012 by a user identified as OfficialADJT.
At that time, Tinubu was neither president nor operating any official presidential social media presence.
“The handle they are prosecuting today was created in 2012 by someone called OfficialADJT, when Tinubu was not the president.
They clearly don’t know the difference between a personal account from Lagos days and the official presidential handle Nigeria uses today,” Sowore said.
Currently facing trial for allegedly describing President Tinubu as a criminal, Sowore argued that the case extends beyond personal grievances, positioning it as a critical moment for freedom of expression and democratic accountability in Nigeria.
He warned that restricting public access to the trial could undermine trust in the legal system.
“Without transparency, there can be no justice. Proceedings like this should be livestreamed to the global community,” he said, advocating for court hearings to be broadcasted internationally.
Sowore accused the DSS of opposing livestreaming because the agency had performed poorly during court proceedings.
He highlighted that security agents appeared unaware that the account under prosecution had no official connection to the presidency, confusing it with the formal presidential handle.
According to him, this shows a serious lack of expertise and preparation on the part of the DSS.
The activist stressed that his position on criminality has remained consistent, claiming that his statements are backed by substantial documentary evidence.
“We have court records that clearly establish who is a criminal and who is not. Criminality begins when crimes are committed, and we have evidence. Whether they accept it or not does not alter the facts,” he stated.
Adding to the debate on transparency, Sowore’s lead counsel, Abubakar Marshal, emphasized that court proceedings in Nigeria are constitutionally required to be public.
Marshal referenced high-profile trials such as that of Nnamdi Kanu in 2015, which were livestreamed, noting that open access strengthens the credibility of the judicial system.
Marshal criticised the government’s witness, describing the testimony as poorly informed and lacking basic facts. Several documents tendered by the prosecution were rejected, exposing weaknesses in the case.
“When a trial is not built on facts, it inevitably collapses. The witness repeatedly claimed ignorance on basic issues, which was quite embarrassing,” he said.
Highlighting the importance of moving the Nigerian judiciary into the digital era, Marshal argued that courts must abandon outdated analogue practices in favour of modern, transparent processes.
“There is nothing wrong with the public knowing about proceedings that could shape Nigeria’s political landscape, especially on free speech, political commentary, integrity, and accountability,” he added.
Both Sowore and his legal team framed the trial as not just a personal matter but a case that concerns all Nigerians.
They argued that public office is a trust, and authority belongs to the people rather than the individual occupying a position of power.
“Public power does not belong to the individual in office. Sovereignty belongs to the people, and government authority flows from them,” Marshal said, underscoring the broader democratic implications of the case.
Marshal further explained that the resources and powers entrusted to the president are meant to serve the nation collectively, not for personal benefit.
“The president represents the country at all times and must speak truthfully about Nigeria. That is why we are in court—to defend the right of Nigerians to demand accountability,” he stated.
Sowore has consistently called on citizens to remain vigilant in protecting freedom of speech and to insist that government actions align with democratic principles.
He warned that failing to uphold transparency could set a dangerous precedent, weakening civil liberties and the right to political expression.
Concluding the remarks, Marshal reiterated that this trial is a defining moment for Nigeria, particularly regarding freedom of expression and government accountability.
He stressed that authority must always be exercised for the common good of Nigerians, reinforcing that the prosecution of Sowore is emblematic of broader democratic struggles in the country.
By challenging the DSS over the prosecution of an unrelated social media handle, Sowore has thrust issues of judicial transparency, accountability, and free speech into the spotlight, creating a significant debate about the role of public power and citizens’ rights in modern Nigeria.
Ireport247news
