Court Throws Out Evidence Presented by Sowore in Tinubu Defamation Trial

• A Federal High Court in Abuja rejected documents tendered by Omoyele Sowore in his ongoing defamation case involving President Bola Tinubu.
• The judge ruled that the materials could not be admitted through a witness who said he did not know of them.
• The court also raised concerns over alleged live-streaming of proceedings, describing it as possible contempt.

The Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected two sets of documents presented by Omoyele Sowore, publisher of Sahara Reporters, in his ongoing trial over alleged defamatory remarks against President Bola Tinubu, dealing a setback to the defence’s attempt to introduce media publications into evidence.

Justice Mohammed Umar delivered the ruling on Wednesday, declining an oral application by Sowore’s lawyer, Marshall Abubakar, who had urged the court to admit printed online reports as exhibits. Sowore is being prosecuted by the State Security Service (SSS) over posts on his X and Facebook accounts in which he reportedly referred to President Tinubu as “a criminal.”

The rejected publications included reports on the dismissal of 115 SSS officials for misconduct, corruption charges filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against five former governors, the sack of 27 EFCC officers over fraud-related allegations, and the arrest of former NNPC staff over a N7.2 billion fraud case. The defence had argued that the materials were relevant to establishing context around public accountability and corruption-related discourse.

Why the judge rejected the documents

In his ruling, Justice Umar agreed with the prosecution that the defence could not tender the documents through the first prosecution witness, who had earlier told the court during cross-examination that he did not know the publications.

“You cannot tender a document through a witness who said he did not know anything about it,” the judge ruled. “The document is hereby marked as rejected.”

Also read: Sowore Countersues DSS, Meta, and X in Landmark Case to Defend Free Speech in Nigeria

The court also dismissed a second batch of documents, which the defence claimed showed that President Tinubu had previously described former President Goodluck Jonathan as “a drunkard and sinking fisherman,” and former President Olusegun Obasanjo as “an expired meat.” Justice Umar ruled that these, too, could not be admitted for the same procedural reasons.

However, the judge noted that the defence could still seek to tender the documents later during its own case, rather than through prosecution witnesses.

Court flags alleged live-streaming of proceedings

Beyond the dispute over admissible evidence, the court also raised concerns about claims by the prosecuting counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde, that a member of the defence team had live-streamed earlier proceedings in the case. He urged the court to order an investigation to identify whoever was responsible.

Although Abubakar denied the allegation and suggested it could have been carried out by operatives of the DSS or individuals linked to the presidency, Justice Umar said such conduct, if proven, amounted to contempt of court and undermined the integrity of judicial proceedings.

He noted that identifying the person responsible would not be difficult and that security agencies could be directed to investigate the matter. While the judge said he would address the issue later in the day, he did not return to it when adjourning the case.