Sowore Launches Legal Counter-Offensive as DSS Pursues Criminal Charges Over Social Media Posts

Pro-democracy activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore has escalated his legal battle with Nigeria’s security apparatus by filing two fundamental rights lawsuits at the Federal High Court in Abuja. The move comes as a direct response to criminal charges filed against him by the Department of State Services (DSS) over social media posts describing President Bola Ahmed Tinubu as a “criminal.”

Through his legal representative Tope Temokun, Sowore initiated his counter-suits on Monday, the same day the DSS filed its own legal action. The activist’s fundamental rights applications specifically target Facebook and X (formerly Twitter), seeking to prevent these platforms from complying with government demands to remove his controversial posts about the president.

Sowore’s legal strategy centers on constitutional protection of free expression, arguing that the DSS campaign represents an unconstitutional assault on free speech that threatens the democratic rights of all Nigerian citizens.

The security agency’s lawsuit, filed on September 16, 2025, presents a comprehensive five-count criminal complaint against Sowore and the social media giants Meta and X. The case was initiated by M.B. Abubakar, Director of Public Prosecutions at the Federal Ministry of Justice, supported by four DSS legal counsel.

The criminal charges focus on three key allegations:

First Count: Violation of cybercrime laws through Sowore’s August 25 post on X (@YeleSowore), where he referenced “this criminal @officialPBAT” in relation to President Tinubu. The DSS argues this breaches Section 24(2)(b) of the Cybercrimes Prohibition and Prevention Act, 2024.

Second Count: A similar Facebook post from August 26, which authorities claim was designed to incite disorder among government critics and opposition voices.

Third Count: Publication of allegedly defamatory content online, contravening Section 375 of Nigeria’s Criminal Code.

The activist has mounted a vigorous public defense of his actions, characterizing the charges as legally fabricated. In a public statement, Sowore declared that the State Security Service had “invented” what he termed “novel offences” simply because he labeled President Tinubu a criminal.

Demonstrating his commitment to fighting the charges, Sowore has pledged to appear for trial when summoned, positioning the case as a critical battleground for constitutional rights and freedom of expression in Nigeria.

This legal confrontation represents more than a personal dispute between an activist and the state. It highlights the ongoing tension between Nigeria’s security establishment and civil society over the boundaries of acceptable political discourse in the digital age. The outcome could establish important precedents for how social media criticism of government officials is handled under Nigeria’s legal framework.

The case also puts international social media platforms in a difficult position, forcing them to navigate between compliance with local government demands and their stated commitments to protecting user expression rights globally.