Sowore’s Free Speech Suit Against DSS, Meta, Others Adjourned For Ruling

The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed March 24, 2026, for judgment in a suit filed by human rights activist and former presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, against the Department of State Services (DSS), X and Meta Platforms Inc over alleged attempts to censor his social media posts critical of President Bola Tinubu.

Justice Umar Mohammed adjourned for judgment after all parties in the suit adopted their processes.

The suit is marked FHC/CS/ABJ/1887/2025, with the State Security Service, the Director-General of the SSS, Meta Platforms Inc (formerly Facebook), Meta Platforms Limited, and Facebook Nigeria Operations listed as respondents.

At Monday’s proceedings, Sowore’s counsel, Tope Temokun, informed the court that the applicant had filed a notice of discontinuance against the 4th and 5th respondents, Meta Platforms Limited and Facebook Nigeria Operations, on the basis that they had no connection with the case.

The notice was dated and filed on January 16, and Temokun applied that their names be struck out.

Other parties in the suit raised no objections.

Arguing the substantive suit, Temokun told the court that the alleged move to censor Sowore’s account was unlawful, stressing that calling someone a criminal could not amount to a national security issue.

“Calling someone a criminal cannot affect national security. It is the person who was mentioned that should respond. Allegation of criminality is personal,” Temokun argued.

“The first and second respondents are not allowed to rise in defence of a personal individual. It is not allowed under our laws,” he added.

Responding on behalf of the DSS and its Director-General, Akinlolu Kehinde, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, argued that the post was directed at the state and capable of inciting public disorder.

“It is a post targeted against the state, meant to harass and insult the sensibility of Nigerians,” Kehinde submitted.

While acknowledging constitutional guarantees, he warned that such rights must be exercised responsibly.

“The constitutional guarantees of Nigerians must be enjoyed, but it must be done in a way that such enjoyment does not affect public safety and public health,” he said.

“This post is capable of causing a total breakdown of law and order. We wrote to the companies to take down the post,” he told the court.

He added that instead of allowing the platforms to investigate, the applicant rushed to court.

“They chose to bully and make some unfounded statements,” Kehinde said, urging the court to dismiss the suit and award N10m in costs.

Counsel for Meta Platforms Inc, Paul Mgbeoma, described the suit as speculative, arguing that no action had been taken against Sowore’s account.

“As I speak, he is still posting on his accounts. This shows that the respondent has not taken any action against the applicant,” he said.

He maintained that the only grievance against Meta was an alleged attempt by the DSS to persuade the company to act, which did not crystallise into any censorship.

“The only grievance is that the 1st and 2nd respondents attempted to get the 3rd respondent to delete the applicant’s account,” Mgbeoma said, urging the court to dismiss the suit as frivolous.

In his reply, Temokun insisted that the action was preventive, while urging the issuance of an order to stop Meta from taking any action against Sowore.

“What we are saying is that whether you want to or not, don’t do it. That is the reason for our suit, so the court can bar them from carrying out the action or deleting the applicant’s account,” he said.

He added that granting the reliefs sought would not prejudice the respondents.

After hearing arguments from all parties, Justice Mohammad adjourned the matter to March 24, 2026, for judgment.

In a related suit marked FHC/CS/ABJ/1888/2025, Sowore also sued the State Security Service, its Director-General, and X Corp (formerly Twitter, Inc) over similar allegations of attempted censorship.

Counsel to the DSS, Akinlolu Kehinde, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, appeared for the 1st and 2nd respondents, while Christabel Ndeokwelu represented X Corp.

Ndeokwelu told the court that X intended to study the court processes before responding. She therefore requested for an adjournment to enable them do that.

With no objection from other parties, Justice Mohammed adjourned the case to February 26, 2026.