The Traffic

Sowore’s Lawyers to X: Ignore DSS ‘Unlawful’ Request to Delete Tinubu Post

The legal team of activist and publisher, Omoyele Sowore, has urged social media platform X (formerly Twitter) to disregard a request from Nigeria’s Department of State Services (DSS) seeking the deletion of one of his posts on President Bola Tinubu.

In a statement on Sunday, Sowore revealed that X had officially notified him of a letter from the DSS demanding the removal of his content and the deactivation of his verified account on grounds that his post could “incite violence” and “threaten national security.”

But his lawyers, Tope Temokun Chambers, described the DSS demand as unconstitutional and a blatant attempt at censorship.

‘DSS is not a court of law’

In their response to X, the law firm argued that only a court of competent jurisdiction can lawfully restrict freedom of expression, citing Section 39(1) of the 1999 Constitution, Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and multiple judicial precedents.

“The DSS is not a court of law and cannot arrogate such powers to itself,” the letter stated.

The chambers accused the Nigerian government of a “historical pattern of repression” against Sowore, referencing his repeated arrests, detentions, and ongoing trials since 2019.

Pattern of harassment

The firm also recalled that during the recent #EndBadGovernance protest, Sowore was placed on a “no-entry” list by the Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS) and has continued to face fresh charges even though his passport remains in court custody.

“This request is not an isolated incident but part of a pattern of harassment and censorship designed to silence a critic of the government,” the lawyers noted.

International dimension

The letter further pointed out that Sowore is a U.S. permanent resident, warning that compliance with the DSS request would expose X to complicity in international human rights violations.

“To comply with the DSS request would make X complicit in the violation of both Nigerian and international human rights standards,” the lawyers stressed.

Final warning to X

The chambers demanded that X ignore the DSS directive, describing it as an attempt to “aid and abet state repression.”

“Our client reserves the right to seek redress before competent national and international fora should any action be taken that violates his rights,” the letter concluded.

By Haruna Yakubu Haruna