The Federal Government of Nigeria has removed Meta Platforms Inc. and X Inc. from the amended cyberbullying charges filed against politician and activist Omoyele Sowore.
The development was announced on Monday before Federal High Court, Abuja, by government counsel A.T. Kehinde, SAN, during proceedings before Justice Mohammed Umar.
Kehinde informed the court that although the case was initially scheduled for trial, the prosecution had filed an amended charge dated December 5, 2025, and requested that it be read to the defendant.
Counsel to Sowore, Abubakar Marshal, confirmed receipt of the amended charge and raised no objection to its being read.
Lawyers representing Meta and X, Paul Ihuoma and Christabel D., also informed the court that their clients had been removed from the charge.
Justice Umar consequently ruled that “the names of Meta and X are hereby struck out from the case” and ordered that the amended charge be read in open court.
However, Sowore expressed concern over a reference in the amended charge to “officialABAT,” stating that he did not understand who the handle referred to. In the original charge — now withdrawn — he had been accused of cyberbullying the President of Nigeria.
After consulting briefly with his lawyer, Sowore allowed the charge to be read to him.
Allegation and Legal Basis
The Federal Government alleges that Sowore made a false statement capable of provoking a breakdown of law and order, contrary to Section 24(1)(b) of the Cybercrimes Act (as amended in 2024).
One of the counts relates to a statement allegedly posted via Sowore’s verified X account @YeleSowore, which read:
“THIS CRIMINAL @OFFICIALPBAT ACTUALLY WENT TO BRAZIL TO STATE THAT THERE IS NO MORE CORRUPTION UNDER HIS REGIME IN NIGERIA. WHAT AUDACITY TO LIE SHAMELESSLY!”
The prosecution contends that the statement was knowingly false and intended to incite disorder.
Sowore pleaded not guilty to the two-count charge.
Trial Delayed Over Procedural Issues
Following the plea, the prosecution requested that trial commence immediately. However, Sowore’s counsel objected, arguing that the prosecution failed to comply with the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) by not front-loading:
-
the defendant’s statement,
-
a list of witnesses, and
-
summaries of the witnesses’ intended testimony.
Marshal maintained that these materials are mandatory for a fair trial and must be disclosed before proceedings can begin.
In response, Kehinde argued that such requirements primarily apply in Magistrates’ Courts and added that witness identities involving intelligence officers could be protected, subject to cross-examination applications.
Justice Umar rejected the argument, stating that even anonymous or sensitive witnesses must be accompanied by summaries of evidence.
“Even if it is an evil spirit that is listed as a witness in a criminal trial, the case summary of the witnesses must be attached,” the judge ruled.
The court ordered the prosecution to furnish Sowore with all required materials and adjourned the matter to January 22 for hearing.
