The law firm of Tope Temokun Chambers, representing Omoyele Sowore, publisher of Sahara Reporters, has urged X to disregard a request from Nigeria’s Department of State Services (DSS) seeking the removal of one of Sowore’s posts about President Bola Tinubu.
Gatekeepers News reports that DSS had reportedly written to X demanding the deactivation of Sowore’s verified account, arguing that his recent post on Tinubu could incite unrest and undermine national security.
In a statement on Sunday, Sowore revealed that X had contacted him over the DSS letter requesting his content be deleted.
Responding, Tope Temokun Chambers described the move as “unlawful, unconstitutional and without legal foundation.” The lawyers cited Section 39(1) of the 1999 Constitution, Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and several judicial precedents, stressing that only a competent court can restrict free expression.
It said, “The DSS is not a court of law and cannot arrogate such powers to itself.”
The chambers accused Nigerian government of maintaining a historical pattern of repression against Sowore, pointing to his repeated arrests, detentions, and ongoing trials since 2019.
They also recalled that during the recent #EndBadGovernance protest, Sowore was placed on a no-entry list by Nigerian Immigration Service (NIS) and still faces new charges despite his passport being withheld in court since February.
The letter added, “This request is not an isolated incident but part of a pattern of harassment and censorship designed to silence a critic of the government.”
Highlighting the international dimension, the lawyers reminded X that Sowore is a U.S. permanent resident, warning that compliance with the DSS directive would amount to complicity in the violation of human rights obligations.
The law firm added, “We must emphasize that Mr. Sowore is a U.S.-based permanent resident, which makes this issue one of not only Nigerian constitutional law but also of international concern. To comply with the DSS request would make X complicit in the violation of both Nigerian and international human rights standards.”
Concluding, the chambers demanded that X reject the DSS order, stating “In view of the above, we demand that X disregard the unlawful request of the DSS. Any compliance with this censorship attempt would amount to aiding and abetting state repression in violation of binding human rights obligations. Our client reserves the right to seek redress before competent national and international fora should any action be taken that violates his rights.”
