A Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday rejected an attempt by the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress, Omoyele Sowore, to tender an uncertified court document in his defence against alleged criminal defamation charges.
Sowore is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services over allegations that he described President Bola Tinubu as a “criminal” in posts published on his X and Facebook accounts.
During the proceedings, Sowore’s counsel, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika (SAN), sought to tender, through the third defence witness, Wayne Elijah, a copy of court documents which the witness said he had received on the defendant’s behalf while serving on Sowore’s former legal team.
Elijah told the court that he accepted service of the documents from the prosecution during his time as one of the defendant’s lawyers.
However, prosecuting counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), objected, arguing that the document was a court record and could only be admitted in evidence if it was either the original or a Certified True Copy.
He contended that the defence sought to tender only a photocopy, which was inadmissible.
Ruling, Justice Mohammed Umar upheld the objection and rejected the document.
“The document is coming from the custody of a counsel who claimed to be counsel in this matter. The reason for certification is to be sure the document has not been tampered with.
“Having been in the custody of the said counsel, how is the court sure that the document has not been tampered with? The document is rejected and marked as such,” the judge held.
Under cross-examination, Elijah admitted that he was present in court while the second defence witness testified earlier in the day.
He, however, maintained that he was “in and out of the courtroom,” adding that the court’s CCTV footage could confirm his movements.
Earlier, the second defence witness, Uwem Davies, a principal officer in the General Services Department of the DSS, testified under subpoena that he wrote a letter directing Sowore to remove the social media posts on the instruction of the Director-General of the DSS.
Davies told the court that the January 22 letter was the only correspondence he authored requesting the defendant to retract the posts concerning President Tinubu because they were allegedly generating tension in the country.
When shown another letter dated September 7, 2025, addressed to the Chief Executive Officer of Meta, Davies acknowledged that although the document bore his name, he did not author it.
He explained that the letter was written by his colleague, B. Bamigboye, who has since retired from the DSS.
Davies also confirmed that he did not personally interact with Sowore before writing the January 22 letter, stating that he merely acted on the directive of the DSS Director-General.
Asked whether he or the DSS Director-General were supporters of President Tinubu, Davies said he did not know, insisting that he simply carried out official instructions.
He also admitted that he did not consult any of the President’s supporters before writing the letter.
Following the witness’ responses, Olumide-Fusika informed the court that he might have no option but to subpoena the DSS Director-General because Davies was unable to answer some of the questions put to him.
During cross-examination by the prosecution, Davies maintained that all the actions he took in relation to the case were performed strictly in his official capacity.
He confirmed that the subpoena compelling his attendance was served on the DSS before it was assigned to him.
Davies also told the court that Bamigboye authored a separate letter to X Corp on behalf of the DSS Director-General in connection with the case and that he had copies of both the letter and the subpoena served on Bamigboye.
When Kehinde sought to tender the two documents in evidence, the defence objected, and Justice Umar sustained the objection.
Although Olumide-Fusika informed the court that the defence still had about 20 witnesses to call, he applied for an adjournment to enable him prepare an application seeking the issuance of a subpoena to the DSS Director-General.
The senior lawyer also told the court that he had requested a subpoena for the Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, but court bailiffs had been unable to effect service.
Justice Umar adjourned the matter until July 28 for the continuation of the defence.
