Federal High Court Dismisses Sowore's Fundamental Rights Suit Against DSS and Meta
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by politician and publisher Omoyele Sowore against the Department of State Services (DSS), its Director General, and Meta Platforms Incorporated, the parent company of Facebook. In a judgment delivered on Thursday, April 2, 2026, Justice Mohammed Umar ruled comprehensively against Sowore on all issues presented, declined to grant any of the reliefs sought, and dismissed the entire case for lacking merit.
Background of the Case and Sowore's Allegations
Sowore had initiated the legal action alleging that Meta, acting on the directive of the DSS and its Director General, removed a Facebook post he made on August 26, 2025, and subsequently deactivated his account. In the controversial post, Sowore described President Bola Tinubu as a "criminal," writing, "This criminal actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!" He contended that the removal of this post and the deactivation of his account without prior notice constituted a violation of his constitutional rights to fair hearing, freedom of expression, and freedom of association.
Court's Detailed Reasoning on Fair Hearing and Freedom of Expression
In his thorough judgment, Justice Umar held that Sowore's claim of a breach of his right to fair hearing was fundamentally misplaced. The judge emphasized that such rights, as enshrined in Chapter Four of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), apply exclusively to proceedings before a court or a tribunal established by law. "There would be no case of infringement of the right to fair hearing under Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution when the decision alleged to have violated one's constitutional right to fair hearing is that of a non-judicial body," Justice Umar stated, clarifying the legal scope of this protection.
Furthermore, the court ruled that the actions taken by the DSS and Meta did not amount to a violation of Sowore's rights to freedom of expression and association. Justice Umar elaborated that the right to freedom of expression is not absolute and can be lawfully restricted in certain circumstances. "It is to be noted that the protection of the rights and reputation of others is one of the instances where the right to freedom of expression can be curtailed. Expression can be restricted to protect the rights, reputation, or privacy of others. This is to say, where an expression is meant to disparage an individual or a group of individuals, the law will not allow it," the judge explained, underscoring the balance between free speech and the protection of others' rights.
Meta's Independent Action and Sowore's Failure to Prove Violation
Addressing the role of Meta Platforms, Justice Umar agreed with the submissions made by the first and second respondents (the DSS and its DG), stating, "This court agreed with the submission of the first and second respondents that whatever action Facebook has taken is entirely done under its own policies and independent judgment." This finding reinforced the court's position that there was no evidence of collusion or directive from state authorities as alleged by Sowore.
On the specific reliefs sought by Sowore, the court held that he had failed to establish that his constitutional rights had been violated or were under any imminent threat. "A careful perusal of the deposition of the applicant in the affidavit in support of the application shows the applicant has failed to convince this court that his rights as guaranteed under Sections 36(1), 39, and 41 have been or are likely to be threatened by the respondents. This court is of the firm view that the applicant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought and so hold. On the whole, I find no merit in this application, and it is hereby dismissed," Justice Umar concluded decisively.
Costs Awarded Against Sowore
Following applications for costs by the legal counsel representing the DSS and Meta Platforms, the court awarded a total of N1.5 million against Omoyele Sowore. This sum is to be paid as N500,000 to each of the three respondents involved in the case, marking a significant financial consequence for the dismissed suit.
