Detention ordered as judge dismisses recusal bid; activist faces charges over social media post describing president as criminal

A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the detention of Omoyele Sowore, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress and publisher of Sahara Reporters, at the Kuje Correctional Centre pending the determination of his motion challenging the revocation of his bail.

Justice Mohammed Umar issued the remand order on Monday, 22 June 2026, after dismissing Sowore’s application seeking the judge’s recusal from the case on grounds of alleged bias.

Sowore is facing prosecution by the Department of State Services on charges relating to social media posts in which he described President Bola Tinubu as a “criminal” on his X and Facebook accounts. The DSS filed a five-count charge of criminal defamation against the activist after he refused to delete the posts, insisting that his comments were protected under his fundamental right to freedom of expression.

Justice Umar rejected Sowore’s recusal application, ruling that the issues raised amounted an afterthought. The judge held that Sowore had already actively participated in the proceedings, including filing a no-case submission, before raising the bias complaint.

“A defendant cannot fully participate in proceedings and later rely on the same circumstances as grounds to seek the recusal of the trial judge,” Umar stated, citing the legal principle that a party cannot “approbate and reprobate” at the same time.

The judge adjourned hearing on the motion for stay of execution, filed by Sowore’s newly engaged counsel Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika (SAN), to 24 June 2026.

Detention follows bail revocation

The remand order came after the judge revoked Sowore’s bail on 16 June 2026, following his failure to appear for a scheduled court hearing. The prosecution had sought the revocation, describing Sowore’s repeated absences as “delay tactics.” Justice Umar subsequently issued a bench warrant for his arrest.

At the earlier hearing on 16 June, the court found that a letter sent on Sowore’s behalf seeking an adjournment did not provide adequate reasons for his absence. The prosecution had opposed the adjournment request, prompting the judge’s decision to revoke bail and issue the arrest warrant.

On Monday, when Sowore appeared before the court after his arrest, his new counsel apologised for the defendant’s absence on the previous hearing date, explaining that the absence related to consultations with his new legal team. However, Justice Umar proceeded with the remand order despite this explanation.

Detention sparks political accusations

The detention has intensified political controversy surrounding the case. The Oyo chapter of the AAC condemned the court’s decision, describing it as political persecution and alleging an attempt to frustrate Sowore’s political activities. The party argued that Sowore had attended previous hearings and had requested alternative dates because of a scheduled trip.

Sowore, demonstrating his defiance, arrived at court on Monday carrying personal items including toiletries and clothing in anticipation of the remand order. Speaking to journalists after the proceedings, he said he was “the least bothered” by the detention.

“Imprisonment has never defeated a just cause, and it never will,” he stated.

“I’m going to prison to keep mobilizing our people. The court was told by the prosecution that they must insist on sending me to Kuje Prison until Wednesday. 

“I came prepared. I even brought my prison bag. All these are happening for a good reason. Somebody must make sacrifices that will benefit this country,” he said.

“I urge the Nigerian people and all our comrades to remain resolute, steadfast, and unyielding in the quest for a genuine revolution that will liberate our country from oppression, injustice, and misrule.”

Detention rooted in speech rights dispute

The underlying dispute originated when Sowore posted on social media in August 2025 that President Tinubu was a “criminal,” commenting on statements the president had made during a trip to Brazil. When the DSS demanded that Sowore delete the posts, he refused, asserting his constitutionally protected right to freedom of expression.

The prosecution subsequently filed the defamation charges, culminating in the May rejection of Sowore’s no-case submission by Justice Umar, who ruled that the DSS had established a prima facie case against the activist.