Alleged Cyberstalking : Court Rejects Sowore’s Documents

In two rulings yesterday, a Federal High Court in Abuja rejected two sets of documents tendered by politician and online publisher, Omoyele Sowore, in his ongoing trial on a cyberstalking charge.

Sowore is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS) for allegedly making a false claim against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu by referring to him as a criminal in a post he made on his “X” and Facebook accounts.

In the first ruling, Justice Mohammed Umar declined an oral application by Sowore’s lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, that a set of documents, comprising printouts of publications, be admitted in evidence.

The publications included media reports about DSS’ dismissal of 115 officials for misconduct, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charging five ex-governors with corruption, EFCC’s sacking 27 of its officials over fraud and misconduct and EFCC’s arrest of some former workers of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) over N7.2 billion fraud.

In the ruling, Justice Umar agreed with prosecuting lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), that the best opportunity for the defendant to tender the documents is during his defence.

The judge held that since the first prosecution witness (PW1), being cross-examined by Abubakar, said he knew nothing about the publications contained in the documents, such documents could not be tendered through the witness.

“You cannot tender a document through a witness who said he did not know anything about it.

The document is marked as rejected,” Justice Umar said.

In the second ruling, the judge rejected another set of documents, which comprised the printouts of publications.

Abubakar said the documents showed that President Tinubu had in 2011 called then President Goodluck Jonathan a drunkard and a sinking fisherman; he also called former President Olusegun Obasanjo an expired meat.

The judge marked the documents rejected for the same reason he gave in rejecting the first set of documents.

Justice Umar frowned at the report by the prosecution lawyer that a member of the defence team had live-streamed previous proceedings in the case and urged the court to order an investigation to identify the person behind it.

Although Abubakar denied that any member of the defence team was involved and claimed that it could have been done by the DSS or people in the presidency, the judge said such conduct amounted to contempt of court.

Abubakar urged the court to only caution against a repeat of such an incident but to decline the request by the prosecution lawyer that an investigation be ordered by the court.

Justice Umar said it was easy to identify the person behind the incident and that he could direct security agencies to investigate the issue because it was a serious matter.

Garry Ochigbo, Edited By Grace Namiji