Sowore’s remand was ordered by Court, not us – DSS

The Department of State Services (DSS) has denied responsibility for the remand of activist and publisher Omoyele Sowore at the Kuje Custodial Centre, insisting that his detention resulted solely from court proceedings and not from any action taken by the agency.

The clarification followed public scrutiny over the circumstances that led to Sowore’s remand after dramatic scenes at the Federal High Court in Abuja.

In a statement issued on Wednesday by the Deputy Director of Public Relations and Strategic Communications at the DSS headquarters, Favour Dozie, the agency said its Director-General, Adeola Ajayi, had ordered an investigation into the conduct of operatives captured in videos recorded at the court on June 22.

The DSS said it had taken note of concerns arising from footage showing Sowore in an altercation with a Nigerian Correctional Service official and an apparent scuffle involving DSS personnel.

According to the agency, although Sowore eventually opted to enter a DSS vehicle rather than one belonging to the Nigerian Correctional Service after the incident, the Director-General had directed an immediate probe into the actions of officers involved.

“From the foregoing, it is clear that the issues which led to the revocation of his bail and his subsequent remand arose entirely from court processes, as the Service neither arrested him nor opposed his bail application,” the statement said.

The DSS explained that the case originated from social media posts made by Sowore on August 25, 2025, concerning President Bola Tinubu following remarks attributed to the President during a visit to Brazil.

Rather than arrest him immediately, the agency said it initially pursued a less confrontational approach.

“Rather than resort to arrest, the Service, in a letter dated September 4, 2025, demanded a retraction within one week,” the DSS stated.

The agency said the decision reflected the leadership style of its current Director-General, who prefers dialogue and judicial processes before considering enforcement measures.

The DSS disclosed that it subsequently filed charges against Sowore under Section 24 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CR/481/2025.

According to the agency, the case was instituted to allow the court determine whether Sowore’s comments regarding the President constituted an offence under the law.

To demonstrate what it described as its commitment to resolving disputes through legal channels, the DSS cited previous cases, including litigation involving the “Shadow Government” initiative of Pat Utomi.

The agency said it sought judicial clarification in that matter without making arrests or issuing invitations and noted that the Federal High Court eventually declared the initiative unconstitutional.

The DSS also referenced incidents involving reports of alleged invasions of the Lagos State House of Assembly and the National Assembly Complex by its operatives, saying it sought public apologies and later withdrew charges after corrections were issued.

It further pointed to separate defamation and libel cases filed by two of its officers against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, noting that the courts ruled in favour of the officers.

The agency maintained that these examples underscored its commitment to due process and the rule of law.

The DSS also noted that Sowore was granted bail on self-recognition at the commencement of his trial and stressed that it did not oppose the application.

“The public may wish to note that Sowore was granted bail on self-recognition, without the requirement of a surety, at the commencement of the trial. The Service did not oppose the application, and Sowore himself publicly welcomed the decision,” the statement added.

The agency reaffirmed its commitment to professionalism and lawful conduct, stating that it would continue to carry out its duties with civility, even in the face of provocation.