…Awards N1.5m cost against him
By Vivian Okejeme
Justice Mohammed Garba Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, yesterday dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by Omoyele Sowore against the Department of State Services (DSS), its Director General, and Meta Platforms Incorporated (formerly Facebook).
Consequently, the court awarded N1.5 million in costs against the online publisher and convener of the #RevolutionNow protest.
In its decision, the court resolved three issues posed for determination against Sowore, ruling that his claims were lacking in merit.
R Recall that in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1887/2025, the Plaintiff submitted that Meta Incorporated, allegedly acting on instructions from the DSS and its Director General, took down a post he made regarding President Bola Tinubu and deactivated his Facebook account.
Sowore had reportedly published a post on August 26, 2025, where he referred to President Tinubu as a “criminal.”
The post read: “This criminal actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!”
Sowore argued that the decision to remove the post and deactivate his account without a hearing contravened his constitutional rights to a fair hearing, freedom of expression, and freedom of association.
On the Issue of Fair Hearing
Justice Umar held that Sowore’s allegation regarding the contravention of his right to a fair hearing was misplaced. The judge noted that the claims did not fall under the legal scope of fundamental rights enforcement as envisaged by the law.
“The law is that, to seek to enforce the fundamental right to fair hearing provided under Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the alleged violation must be in respect of proceedings before a court or tribunal established by law,” the judge stated.
He further clarified that there is no infringement of Section 36(1) when the decision in question is made by a non-judicial body. Since the DSS and Meta are not judicial bodies, the principle of fair hearing did not apply to their administrative actions in this context.
On Freedom of Expression and Association, the court ruled that the DSS’s complaint to Meta and the subsequent deactivation of the account did not violate Sections 39 and 40 of the Constitution. Justice Umar emphasized that these rights are not absolute.
Reputation Matters:
The judge noted that rights can be restricted to protect the reputation or privacy of others.
He cited Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution, noting that the law frowns upon expressions meant to disparage or cast aspersions on individuals.
The judge agreed with the DSS that reporting a post through Facebook’s established channels was a legitimate step.
He ruled that Meta’s decision to take down the post was based on its own internal policies and independent judgment.
Regarding whether Sowore was entitled to the damages and declarations he sought, the judge held that the applicant failed to prove his case.
“A careful perusal of the affidavit shows the applicant has failed to convince this court that his rights have been, or are likely to be, threatened by the respondents,.
“This court is of the firm view that the applicant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought”, Justice Umar said.
Following the dismissal of the suit, counsel for the DSS and its DG, Akinlolu Kehinde, and counsel for Meta Incorporated, Victoria Bassey, applied for legal costs.Justice Umar subsequently awarded N1.5 million against Sowore, to be distributed as N500,000 to each of the three respondents.
