Omoyele Sowore, publisher of Sahara Reporters, on Tuesday, rescinded his earlier decision to have the Director-General of the State Security Service (SSS) summoned to testify in his defence in a cyberstalking trial.

Mr Sowore, through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), announced the withdrawal of the defence’s application for the subpoena during Tuesday’s proceedings before trial judge Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

Mr Sowore, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC) for the forthcoming 2027 general elections, faces criminal defamation, cyberstalking and incitement charges.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that SSS brought the charges against Mr Sowore for calling President Bola Tinubu “a criminal” in social media posts on X and Facebook last year.

| | |
|---|

Mr Sowore has stood by his posts and denied wrongdoing regarding the social media comments.

During the previous proceedings on 22 July, defence lawyer, Mr Olumide-Fusika, informed the judge of his team’s plan to apply for a subpoena to be issued on Mr Ajayi, the SSS boss, to appear in court to present an exhibit and face questioning.

The exhibit wanted by the defence is a letter dated 7 September 2025, asking Mr Sowore to retract his alleged criminal defamatory posts about Mr Tinubu.

Mr Olumide-Fusika said the defence wanted Mr Ajayi to appear because Uwem Davies, the SSS official appearing as the second defence witness on subpoena, could not adequately address questions he raised in relation to the letter.

He noted Mr Davies, who authored the said letter, told the court that he only acted on Mr Ajayi’s directive. iThe defence lawyer said this implied that Mr Ajayi needed to appear to shed more light on the letter.

At the time, Mr Olumide-Fusika told the court that he had 20 witnesses to call and applied for adjournment to enable him to prepare his application for the issuance of a subpoena on the DG of SSS.

Mr Olumide-Fusika also said he had also applied that a subpoena be issued on the spokesman for President Tinubu, Bayo Onanuga.

Tuesday’s hearing

PREMIUM TIMES reported earlier on Tuesday that the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, made a surprise appearance for the prosecution in the trial to block a subpoena against.

It was Mr Fagbemi’s first time appearing in the case.

A private lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde, a SAN, who has been the prosecutor on record, appeared as a support member of the prosecution team led by the AGF on Tuesday.

Mr Kehinde was part of the battery of lawyers, including the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, that appeared with the AGF.

Mr Olumide-Fusika criticised Mr Fagbemi’s appearance without prior notice.

He queried what he and other senior government lawyers were appearing in the case for.

“So what do you want me to do?” Judge Umar asked him, adding “I hope you are not intimidated.”

“I am my lord,” Mr Olumide-Fusika responded in a lighter note..

When the judge asked him if he was ready to continue with the proceedings, the lawyer responded in affirmative.

Mr Olumide-Fusika then announced that the defence’s “next witness is a subpoenaed witness, the DG DSS, Oluwatosin Ajayi, who holds the position.”

In response, Mr Fagbemi queried the competence of the subpoena issued on Mr Ajayi and urged the court that it amounted to an abuse of court’s process.

Mr Fagbemi said it was incorrect to state that the subpoena was served on Mr Ajayi as earlier claimed by the defence lawyer, noting that service of a subpoena ought to be personally served on the person it was directed at.

The AGF also submitted that the application for subpoena and the writ subsequently issued did not indicate when the DSS’ DG was expected to attend court.

The AGF, who argued that the subpoena amounted to an abuse of the process of the court, said that the letter, which the defence had wanted Ajayi to produce and answer questions on, had already been admitted in evidence twice by the court.

“As a matter of record, this document has been tendered and marked Exhibit D. It was also tendered as Exhibit DWC on 22July 2026. It was tendered by the defendant,” Mr Fagbemi said.

The AGF argued that although it was the constitutional right of Mr Sowore to apply for subpoena against anybody in aid of its case, such privilege had limits.

“It is worth hearing that the document in contention was authored by the second defence witness (DW-2),” the AGF said.

He said the matter in contention is an official matter and the DG of the SSS is not being subpoenaed to come in his personal capacity.

“He is being subpoenaed in his official capacity to give evidence in respect of an official letter.

“It is not about his person or any allegations against him. So, there are limits,” he said.

He further argued that the subpoena was being used by the defence for indirect and improper object order than any bonafide purpose.

He also said the application was only to delay proceedings in the trial since the SSS had earlier allowed his official to give evidence in Sowore’s defence.

He urged the court to discountenance the subpoena and call on the defendant to proceed with his defence.

Responding, Mr Olumide-Fusika faulted Mr Fagbemi’s appearance in the case, arguing that if he wished to take over the case from Mr Kehinde, he should do that appropriately by filing a notice.

“What AGF has done today is to appear and make submissions. We are entitled to be notified that he is taking over the prosecution of the case from the lawyer that filed the charge and has been appearing,” Mr Olumide-Fusika said.

He sought leave of court to postpone proceedings to enable him to properly reply to an authority cited by the AGF and urged the court to reject all that the AGF had said.

“He (AGF) is not in the matter. He did not file the proper notice that he was taking over the case,” he added.

Before both lawyers could agree on when to return for Mr Olumide-Fusika to reply to the authority cited, Mr Fagbemi beckoned on the defence lawyer, who left his seat to confer with him, and they quietly conferred briefly.

After their brief conversation, Mr Fagbemi announced that Mr Olumide-Fusika had made a U-turn on his application to summon the DG of the SSS.

He said the defence lawyer agreed that another senior official of the agency could appear to answer the questions regarding the 7 September 2025 letter.

At that point, Mr Fagbemi and Mr Olumide-Fusika agreed that the latest development had overtaken their arguments and said it was no longer necessary for the judge to deliver a ruling on the earlier arguments.

Justice Mohammed Umar subsequently adjourned the matter until 3 August. The SSS official expected to appear during the proceedings will be the defence’s third witness.

Before Mr Davies, the SSS official subpoenaed to testify as the second defence witness, prominent lawyer, Deji Adeyanju, had appeared as the first defence witness.

Testifying as the first defence witness on 6 July, Mr Adeyanju, a lawyer widely known for his public affairs commentaries, defended Mr Sowore’s remark about Mr Tinubu.

He said Mr Tinubu had publicly stated that citizens had the right to criticise and “even insult him” as part of democratic governance.

He also told the court that the president urged the judiciary “not to allow itself to become an instrument of oppression” against government critics.

(NAN)