A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed Omoyele Sowore's suit against the Department of State Services (DSS), its Director-General, and Meta Platforms Incorporated. Justice Mohammed Umar delivered the judgment on Thursday, ruling against Sowore on all grounds and dismissing the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1887/2025 for lacking merit. Sowore had claimed his fundamental rights were breached when Meta removed a Facebook post from August 26, 2025, and deactivated his account after a DSS complaint. In the post, he referred to President Bola Tinubu as a "criminal," writing, "This criminal actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!" He argued the actions of Meta and the DSS violated his rights to fair hearing, freedom of expression, and freedom of association.
Justice Umar held that the right to fair hearing applies only in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, not decisions by non-judicial bodies like the DSS or Meta. He stated that fair hearing "does not apply to the instant case." On freedom of expression, the court ruled the right is not absolute and can be limited to protect the reputation of others. The judge found that Meta acted independently under its policies after receiving the DSS complaint. "Whatever action Facebook has taken is entirely done under its own policies and independent judgment," he said. The court also found Sowore failed to prove any constitutional violation. The suit was dismissed, and N1.5 million in costs was awarded against Sowore, with N500,000 each to the DSS, its Director-General, and Meta.
The court's ruling that Meta acted independently despite a DSS complaint sits uneasily with the reality of state pressure on digital platforms in Nigeria. If a post calling the president a "criminal" is deemed unprotected speech, the line between critique and liability has shifted in ways that favour power over dissent. For Nigerian users, this sets a precedent where social media moderation, even when framed as policy-driven, may reflect political influence rather than neutral enforcement. The cost award against Sowore further raises the price of challenging such actions.
