A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by politician and online publisher, Omoyele Sowore, against the Department of State Services (DSS), its Director General, and Meta Platforms.
In a judgment delivered on Thursday, Justice Mohammed Umar resolved the three issues identified for determination against Sowore and declined to grant any of the reliefs he sought. The court held that the suit lacked merit and consequently dismissed it in its entirety.
Sowore had approached the court, alleging that Meta, the parent company of Facebook, acted on the instruction of the DSS and its Director General to take down a post he made about President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and to deactivate his Facebook account. He argued that the action violated his fundamental rights to freedom of expression and fair hearing as guaranteed under the Nigerian Constitution.
According to court documents, Sowore had on August 26 last year published a post on his Facebook page in which he referred to the President as a “criminal.” He claimed that shortly after the post, it was removed and his account was deactivated, an action he believed was carried out at the instance of the DSS.
In the suit, Sowore asked the court to declare that the alleged directive issued to Meta by the DSS to remove his post and deactivate his account was unlawful and a violation of his fundamental rights. He also sought damages and an order directing Meta to restore his Facebook account and the deleted post.
However, in his judgment, Justice Umar held that Sowore failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove that the DSS directly ordered Meta to remove the post or deactivate the account. The judge ruled that the applicant did not establish the necessary link between the actions of Meta and the DSS to justify the claims of rights violation.
The court further held that Meta, as a private company operating a social media platform, has its own community standards and policies which users must comply with, and that the company reserves the right to remove content that violates its policies.
Justice Umar noted that fundamental rights enforcement suits must be supported by clear and credible evidence showing that a government agency directly violated the applicant’s rights. In this case, the court found that the allegations made by Sowore were not sufficiently proven.
Legal analysts say the judgment reinforces the legal principle that allegations against government agencies must be backed by verifiable evidence, especially in cases involving claims of rights violations and abuse of power.
The ruling has generated mixed reactions among political observers and civil society groups. While some believe the judgment underscores the need for responsible use of social media and respect for platform policies, others argue that the case raises broader questions about digital rights, freedom of expression, and the relationship between governments and social media companies.
Sowore, a former presidential candidate and activist known for his strong criticism of government policies, has been involved in several legal battles involving the DSS and other government institutions in the past. Observers say the latest ruling is likely to further intensify debates around free speech, national security, and online political expression in Nigeria.
As Nigeria’s digital space continues to grow, the case highlights the increasing intersection between politics, law, technology, and human rights, particularly as political activities gradually build toward future elections and public discourse becomes more active online.
