Omoyele Sowore has declined to enter his defence in the cyberbullying trial brought by the State Security Service (SSS), following his social media posts describing President Bola Tinubu as a "criminal". His lawyer, Marshal Abubakar, informed Judge Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday that Sowore had written directly to Chief Judge John Tsoho seeking the reassignment of the case to another judge. This move comes after Judge Umar dismissed Sowore's no-case submission on 8 May, ruling that a prima facie case had been established by the prosecution, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Akinlolu Kehinde. Shortly after that ruling, Sowore and his counsel orally requested Judge Umar to recuse himself, citing alleged bias, but were directed by the court to file a formal application. Abubakar told the court that both he and Sowore had submitted letters and applications dated 19 May to the Chief Judge, supported by affidavits and exhibits outlining their reasons. Kehinde objected, stating the actions contradicted the court's directive and were procedurally invalid, urging the court not to allow the defence to dictate the pace of proceedings. He maintained that Sowore should either enter a defence or declare he had none. Abubakar countered that the defence had acted appropriately and requested an adjournment pending the Chief Judge's decision on the reassignment plea. Judge Umar ruled that the prosecution must file a response to the defence's letters and adjourned the case to 4 June. The bias allegation originated on 8 May when Sowore accused Judge Umar of previously ordering Abubakar to kneel in court, an incident that led to other lawyers intervening. The judge initially repeated the order during the hearing but relented after colleagues intervened. The charges against Sowore were recently amended to remove X Incorp and Meta (Facebook) Incorp as defendants.
Sowore's direct appeal to the Chief Judge bypasses court procedure after his lawyer was ordered to kneel, an act that undermines judicial decorum and fuels claims of bias. The judge's repeated instruction to kneel, even after objection, raises questions about courtroom conduct and the appearance of impartiality. If a sitting judge enforces such physical submission, public trust in judicial neutrality erodes regardless of legal technicalities. The case now hinges not only on cybercrime law but on whether justice can be seen to be administered without humiliation.
⚖️ NaijaBuzz Take is AI-assisted editorial opinion. All persons mentioned are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Full disclaimer →
