Alleged defamation: Sowore drops decision to summon DSS boss as witness

Omoyele Sowore, publisher of Sahara Reporters, on Tuesday rescinded his earlier decision to invite Oluwatosin Ajayi, the Director-General, Department of State Services (DSS), to testify in his defence in the ongoing trial for alleged criminal defamation.

Sowore, through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, made this known shortly before the conclusion of proceeding before Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the defendant was alleged to have made false claims against the person of President Bola Tinubu by referring to him as “a criminal” in a post he made on his “X” and Facebook accounts.

Against this development, the DSS charged Sowore, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC), with criminal defamation, cyberstalking and incitement.

Olumide-Fusika had, on July 22, indicated his intention to apply for a subpoena on the DG of DSS.

The lawyer had wanted Ajayi to appear to testify on his client’s behalf and produce a document: a letter dated Sept. 7, 2025, asking Sowore to retract his alleged criminal defamatory posts about Tinubu.

He said his decision to invite the DG, DSS, was because of the alleged inability of the official of the service, Uwem Davies, who appeared as the second defence witness on subpoena, to adequately address questions he raised in relation to the Sept. 7, 2025 letter.

He had said that since Davies, who authored the said letter, told the court that he acted on the directive of the DG, DSS, it was necessary for Ajayi to appear and shed more light on the letter.

At Tuesday’s hearing, Olumide-Fusika later changed his mind on the issue after a heated argument on the propriety of the appearance of Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), in the case without prior notice.

Earlier when the case was called, Fagbemi announced appearance for the prosecution.

Responding, Olumide-Fusika said the matter was scheduled for continuation of defence.

He, however, said that he could observe that “the prosecution is reinforced with the presence of the AGF and DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN)”.

According to him, I don’t know if there is a reason why they are here.

“So what do you want me to say? I hope you are not intimidated?” Justice Umar asked.

“I am my lord,” Olumide-Fusika responded in a lighter mood.

When the judge asked him if he was ready to continue with the proceedings, the lawyer responded in the affirmative.

Olumide-Fusika then said their “next witness is a subpoenaed witness, the DG of DSS, Oluwatosin Ajayi, who holds the position.”

Fagbemi, who appeared for the first time, queried the competence of the subpoena issued on the DG, DSS, and urged the court to hold that the invitation to the DG, DSS, amounted to an abuse of the court’s process.

Fagbemi said it was incorrect to state that the subpoena was served on Ajayi as earlier claimed by the defence lawyer, noting that service of a subpoena ought to be personal on the person it was directed at.

The AGF also submitted that the application for the subpoena and the writ subsequently issued did not indicate when the DSS’ DG was expected to attend court.

The AGF, who argued that the subpoena amounted to an abuse of the process of the court, said that the letter, which the defence had wanted Ajayi to produce and answer questions on, had already been admitted in evidence twice by the court.

“As a matter of record, this document has been tendered and marked Exhibit D. It was also tendered as Exhibit DWC on July 22, 2026. It was tendered by the defendant,” Fagbemi said.

The AGF argued that although it was the constitutional right of Sowore to apply for a subpoena against anybody in aid of its case, such a privilege had limitations.

Fagbemi said: “It is worth hearing that the document in contention was authored by DW-2 (Davies).

“The matter in contention is an official matter.

“The DG of the DSS is not being subpoenaed to come in his personal capacity.

“He is being subpoenaed in his official capacity to give evidence in respect of an official letter.

“It is not about his person or any allegations against him. So, there are limits.”

He urged the court to discountenance the subpoena and call on the defendant to proceed with his defence.

He further argued that the subpoena was being used by the defence for an indirect and improper object rather than any bonafide purpose.

Besides, he said the application was only to delay proceedings in the trial since the DSS had earlier allowed his official to give evidence in Sowore’s defence.

Responding, Olumide-Fusika faulted Fagbemi’s appearance in the case, arguing that if he wished to take over the case from Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, the lawyer who had been handling it before now, he should do that appropriately by filing a notice.

“What AGF has done today is to appear and make submissions.

“We are entitled to be notified that he is taking over the prosecution of the case from the lawyer that filed the charge and has been appearing,” Olumide-Fusika insisted.

He sought leave of court to enable him to reply to an authority cited by the AGF and urged the court to discountenance all that the AGF had said.

“He (AGF) is not in the matter. He did not file the proper notice that he was taking over the case,” he added.

Before both lawyers could agree on when to return for Olumide-Fusika to reply to the authority cited by the AGF, Fagbemi beckoned on the defence lawyer, who left his seat and moved towards where Fagbemi stood.

They conferred briefly, following which Fagbemi announced that Olumide-Fusika had changed his mind that he would no longer insist that the DG of DSS must appear in person.

He said the defence lawyer said someone else could come to answer the questions he had in respect of the letter of Sept. 7, 2025.

At that point, Fagbemi and Olumide-Fusika agreed that the latest development had overtaken their arguments and said it was no longer necessary for the judge to deliver a ruling on the earlier arguments.

Justice Mohammed Umar subsequently adjourned the matter until Aug. 3 for any official of the DSS to appear in relation to the subpoena earlier directed at the DG, DSS. (NAN)