On Wednesday, January 29 2025, former Presidential Candidate and Activist, Omoyele Sowore, was arraigned before the Federal High Court, Abuja, where he pleaded “not guilty” to a seventeen-count charge under the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act, 2015 (as amended in 2024).
Legal Basis of the Charges
The charges, filed by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kayode Egbetokun, allege that Sowore made false and inciting publications on his verified X handle (formerly Twitter) with the intent to disrupt public order and discredit the Nigeria Police Force. These allegations fall under Section 24(1)(b) and Section 24(2)(c)(ii) of the Cybercrime Act, which criminalize the intentional transmission of false information or statements capable of causing public disorder, inciting violence, or harming an individual’s reputation.
-
Count One accuses Sowore of calling the IGP “illegal” in a post, which the prosecution claims was knowingly false and intended to cause a breakdown of law and order.
-
Count Two alleges that his publication, which tagged the Nigeria Police Force’s official X handle, was meant to incite Nigerians against the police and harm the reputation of the IGP.
-
Count Three cites his post predicting another #EndSARS protest, arguing that it was intended to provoke civil unrest.
Under the Cybercrime Act, these offenses carry severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment, depending on the gravity of the alleged harm caused.
Bail Application and Legal Considerations
After Sowore pleaded “not guilty,” his counsel, Marshall Abubakar, applied for bail, a fundamental right under Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended), which presumes an accused person innocent until proven guilty.
The presiding judge, Justice Abdullah Liman, stood the matter down until 3 PM for a ruling on the bail application. In determining whether to grant bail, the court will consider:
– The severity of the offense and its potential threat to public order.
– Likelihood of the accused interfering with investigations or committing a similar offense.
– Sowore’s previous compliance with legal proceedings.
If bail is granted, it may come with stringent conditions, such as travel restrictions or restrictions on social media use, to prevent further alleged infractions. If denied, Sowore would remain in police or judicial custody pending trial.
Broader Legal Implications
This case highlights the ongoing legal and constitutional debate on freedom of speech versus national security and public order. While Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution guarantees freedom of expression, laws like the Cybercrime Act have been criticized for their broad and vague provisions, which could potentially criminalize dissent and restrict political criticism.
Sowore’s trial is likely to set a legal precedent on how online speech, criticism of public officials, and digital activism are treated under Nigerian law. It also raises questions about whether the Cybercrime Act aligns with international human rights standards on digital freedom and expression.
