ABUJA, Nigeria( VOICE OF NAIJA)-An Abuja Federal High Court on Monday removed Meta Platforms Inc. and X Corporation (formerly Twitter) from the cyberstalking suit filed by the Federal Government against activist and former presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore.
The decision followed the prosecution’s move to amend the charge, a step that left Sowore as the only defendant in the case.
Sowore was initially arraigned on December 2, 2025, in a cybercrime matter marked FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025, alongside Meta Platforms Inc. and X Corporation.
READ ALSO:Lagos Safe, Sowore Still Wanted – Police
The prosecution had accused Sowore of using posts on his verified social media accounts to publish false claims against President Bola Tinubu, referring to him as a “criminal.”
At the resumed proceedings before Justice Umar, the lead prosecutor, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, told the court that an amended charge filed on December 5, 2025, was ready to be read, with no objection from the defence.
The prosecution then withdrew the original charge and formally applied for the names of the second and third defendants Meta Platforms Inc. and X Corporation to be struck out. Justice Umar granted the application, thereby removing both companies from the suit.
According to the amended charge, Sowore allegedly, on or about August 25, 2025, knowingly or intentionally transmitted a message through his verified X handle, @YeleSowore, which the prosecution said was false and capable of causing a breakdown of law and order.
The charge quoted Sowore as posting, “This criminal @officialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is NO MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!”
The prosecution claimed that the post constituted cyberstalking, contrary to Sections 24(1)(b) and 24(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.
When the amended charge was read in court, Sowore pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution sought to proceed with trial and requested to call its first witness, a move challenged by defence counsel, Marshal Abubakar.
Abubakar argued that the prosecution was not prepared for trial, insisting that the amended charge was defective because it failed to identify any prosecution witness or attach witness statements.
Citing Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, he contended that the omission infringed on Sowore’s right to a fair hearing, as the defence could not properly prepare without knowing the witnesses and evidence to be presented.
“The witness sought to be called is unknown to the defence and, indeed, unknown to the court,” Abubakar said.
In response, Kehinde dismissed the objection as speculative, maintaining that Section 36(6) of the Constitution does not require the prosecution to disclose the identity of a witness before testimony.
He added that the defence could apply for an adjournment to enable effective cross-examination, noting that the prosecution intended to call only one witness, who was already present in court.
After hearing arguments from both parties, Justice Umar ordered the prosecution to furnish the defence with the witness statement and adjourned the case to Thursday, January 22, 2026, for a definite hearing.