Court Remands Blogger Over Alleged Soldiers’ Welfare Claims

A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the remand of blogger Mark Chidiebere, widely known as “Justice Crack,” in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS) following his arraignment over alleged misinformation concerning the welfare and feeding conditions of Nigerian soldiers.

Chidiebere, of Plot 88, Sabo Lugbe, Abuja, is facing a three-count charge filed by the DSS over a viral video posted on his X account in which he made claims about the condition of Nigerian military personnel. He pleaded not guilty when the charge was read before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik.

Prosecuting counsel Emmanuel Orubo requested a date to open the prosecution’s case and urged the court to remand the defendant in DSS custody.

Defence counsel Marshall Abubakar made an oral application for bail, which the court declined to hear, directing that a formal application be filed instead.

Justice Abdulmalik ordered that Chidiebere be remanded in DSS custody and adjourned the matter to May 25, 2026, for hearing of the bail application and commencement of trial.

Outside the courtroom, supporters gathered and formed a human barrier in an attempt to prevent DSS operatives from taking the defendant away. Security personnel eventually dispersed the crowd and escorted him from the Federal High Court premises.

Activist Omoyele Sowore and Peter Akah were among those present.

The Nigerian Army said it was aware of online publications in which Chidiebere allegedly shared complaints from soldiers about welfare and feeding conditions, adding that preliminary findings suggested his discussions with soldiers bordered on subversion.

A relative of the blogger alleged that he was targeted after raising concerns about alleged misconduct involving soldiers and the killing of a 24-year-old National Youth Service Corps member, Abdulsamad Jamiu, in Abuja. The claims have not been independently verified.

The Army has previously denied reports circulating online alleging the blogger was abducted and mistreated, including claims of prolonged detention and abuse.

The case has drawn criticism from civil society organisations and press freedom advocates, who have raised concerns over freedom of expression and whistleblowing.