Former Presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore who is reported to be in the custody of the Force Intelligence Department (FID) of the Nigeria Police Force in Abuja has rejected the conditions of bail granted to him by the department, but, why? See the reasons he gave and what the law says below.
In a social media post, Sowore revealed that Deputy Inspector-General (DIG) of the FID, Dasuki Galandachi, informed him of the bail offer, which is pending the conclusion of an ongoing investigation on allegations bordering on cyberstalking. However, Sowore has rejected one of the bail conditions, which required him to present a Level 17 Permanent Secretary as a surety.
Sowore has refused to accept a bail condition that requires him to provide a Level 17 Permanent Secretary as guarantor, opting instead to remain in police custody until the situation is resolved. According to him, he remains committed to upholding his innocence, dignity, and integrity, and will not accept any unreasonable conditions that compromise these values.
“If such unreasonable conditions are imposed, I will choose to remain in detention until I am charged to court. Even then, I know that there is no crime defined or to be investigated. It is just the impunity that has become the hallmark of the PoliceNG hierarchy,” Sowore stated.
Sowore alleged that his arrest and detention were politically motivated, specifically citing his vocal criticism of the tenure extension for Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbarami Egbetokun. He claimed that the police intended to detain him and transfer him to Lagos for a trial that he believed would be unfair and biased, describing it as a “Kangaroo trial.” This isn’t the first time Sowore has faced detention, having previously been arrested by Nigeria’s Department of State Services, in 2019.
Sowore’s case has sparked widespread concern among cicil society, human right groups, and the general public, with many regarding his arrest as an attempt to stifle dissenting voices. His decision to reject what he considers unfair bail conditions has garnered even more support from his followers who view his stance as a courageous stand against systemic injustice and abuse of authority.
As the investigation unfolds, Sowore remains steadfast in his pursuit of justice and accountability. He has reiterated his resolve, stating “I will not be intimidated or coerced into accepting conditions that undermine my rights.”
The obligations of government agencies in setting bail conditions, and the constitutional guide rails provided in our laws to aid citizens’ freedom when citizens are either arrested on suspicion, or when they are already charged before a court of law.
When it comes to the power of the Police to arrest and investigate alleged crimes, the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as altered), in Chapter 2, invested the Nigerian Police or other prosecutorial agencies like ICPC, EFCC, etc with powers to restrict a citizen’s movement, that is, arrest, where there is a reasonable cause to believe that a crime is about to be committed or is being committed, or had already been committed. The Police Act, 2020 also highlight these powers given to the Police, specifically. It is safe to infer that, in this case, the Police is relying on the provisions of the law in the arrest of Mr. Sowore for alleged cyberstalking. But, who may he be stalking? That will be in the charge when the Police finally charge him, permit us not to dive into that. So, It follows as a corollary that an agency that has power to arrest equally has power to set the conditions for bail. Isn’t our law interesting?
Note that in setting the conditions for bail, the arresting authority ( Police, EFCC, ICPC, etc) has to look at factors which include; whether the accused person is a flight risk ( may run away from the jurisdiction of the court and thereby avoid prosecution), whether he may interfere with witnesses (bribe them, intimidate them etc) or destroy evidence (where documents are involved and he may go back to throw it away), whether the accused is ill (arresting authority may not be able to provide medical aid) , whether the safety of the accused person can be guaranteed if he/she is released for the purpose accused person preparing for his and standing his trial, where the arresting authority wants to prosecute.
The fundamental human rights of an accused person who believe the conditions of his or her bail are too strenuous, or steep are contained on the pages of our case laws and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015. An accused person who feels, in this kind of scenario at hand, that his bail conditions are too hard to fulfil may choose to approach the High Court or the Federal High Court as in this case, since a federal agency is involved, for the condition of the bail to be re-set by the Court of law. Can the Court maintain the same conditions set by the administrative body like Police, EFCC, ICPC etc? The answer to this is no. The Court is not bound to maintain the same conditions set by the FID in this case.
In conclusion, while an accused person can elect to remain with the arresting authority until he is charged to the Court of law as Mr. Sowore is doing in this case, it is safe to say that Mr. Sowore may successfully test the conditions of the bail granted him in the Federal High Court. What does Mr. Sowore needs to tell the court? He should show in his statement on oath that he cannot get level 17 Permanent Sec as surety. Truly, he may not know one. How many Nigerians are related to a permanent secretary and how many Perm Secretaries do we have anyway? Mr. Sowore can show the court in his affidavit who he has.
Cyberstalking is a felony and it attract either a fine of N 7,000,000.00 upon conviction or 3 years imprisonment. Section 24 of the Cybercrime (Prevention & Prohibition) Act, 2015 provides for the class of offences in the category and it means intentionally sending offending messages, pictures to a person or to a third parties to in such a way that is offensive. These may be messages on social media etc. Be careful what you send to people.
