ALLEGED CYBERSTALKING: COURT WARNS OF BAIL REVOCATION, POSSIBLE ARREST WARRANT FOR SOWORE

Read Time:2 Minute, 27 Second

By: Balogun Ibrahim

A Federal High Court in Abuja has warned that it may revoke the bail granted to politician and online publisher, Omoyele Sowore, in his ongoing trial over alleged cybercrime offences.

Justice Mohammed Umar issued the warning on Thursday, stating that the court could also issue an arrest warrant to compel Sowore’s appearance if he fails to attend the next hearing.

The judge’s position followed observations and applications by the prosecuting counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), who told the court that Sowore failed to appear despite evidence that a hearing notice had been served on him through his legal team.

Omoyele Sowore is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS) over an alleged false claim against President Bola Tinubu, whom he reportedly described as a criminal in a post shared on his X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook accounts.

At Thursday’s proceedings, Sowore was absent from court, and none of his lawyers said to number about 30 were present at the hearing.

Reacting to the development, Kehinde told the court that the matter was scheduled for the defence to conclude its cross-examination of the prosecution’s first witness.

The prosecuting counsel stated that he verified with the court registry that a hearing notice had been duly served on the defendant through his legal representatives, noting that the prosecution also received its own notice.

Kehinde argued that there was no justification for the defendant’s absence, stressing that he is expected to be present in court at every sitting. He added that no explanation had been provided for why Sowore and his legal team—said to number about 30 failed to appear in court.

250MW IKOM DAM: FG TAKES STEPS TO FINALIZE PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

Citing Sections 352(1) and (2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, Kehinde urged the court to revoke the bail earlier granted to the defendant and to issue a bench warrant for his immediate arrest and production in court to continue his trial.

In his ruling, Justice Umar confirmed that Sowore had been duly served with the hearing notice through his lawyers. However, he noted that the defendant had consistently attended court proceedings since the case commenced late last year.

The judge also observed that previous adjournments in the matter were sought by both the prosecution and the defence.

He therefore held that the defendant should be given the benefit of the doubt, noting that it was the first time he had been absent since the trial began.

Justice Umar warned that if Sowore fails to appear in court on the next scheduled date, he would not hesitate to accede to the prosecution’s request to revoke the defendant’s bail and issue an arrest warrant against him.

The judge adjourned the trial to March 16 and ordered that a fresh hearing notice be served on the defence.