The private prosecutor handling the contentious cyberstalking case against African Action Congress presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore, A.T. Kehinde, SAN, made a surprising declaration in open court on Monday, stating that he could vote for Sowore in the 2027 presidential election.
The statement came during a heated exchange after Sowore’s lead counsel, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, accused the prosecutor of taking the case personally.
The defence lawyer raised the concern after Kehinde sought Sowore’s remand in prison, claiming that the activist and presidential candidate had failed to perfect his bail conditions.
Responding, Kehinde, SAN, insisted that he had nothing personal against Sowore. He went further, stating that he was, in fact, inclined to vote for Sowore in the upcoming presidential election if Sowore could convince him that his ideas and programmes were better than those of the other candidates.
The unexpected declaration drew attention in the courtroom, given Kehinde’s role as the prosecutor in the case brought against Sowore.
SaharaReporters previously reported that human rights lawyer Deji Adeyanju on Monday testified as the first defence witness in the ongoing cyberbullying trial filed by the Department of State Services (DSS) against Sowore.
Testifying before Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja, Adeyanju told the court that he had known Sowore as a respected Nigerian citizen and the presidential candidate of the AAC.
He also tendered a video recording of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in support of the defence’s case, which the court admitted in evidence and marked as an exhibit.
At the commencement of proceedings, the prosecution counsel, Kehinde, SAN, objected to Adeyanju’s appearance as a witness, arguing that he was also counsel in the matter and was therefore not competent to testify.
Responding, lead defence counsel, Olumide-Fusika, SAN, dismissed the objection, maintaining that Adeyanju had never appeared as counsel in the case since he assumed responsibility for Sowore’s defence.
Olumide-Fusika argued that there was no legal basis preventing Adeyanju from testifying as a defence witness.
He also informed the court that the defence had planned to play video clips as part of its case and had earlier notified the court registrar to provide a television monitor for the purpose. However, he said the equipment was unavailable.
Despite the setback, Olumide-Fusika, SAN, told the court that the defence was prepared to proceed with its witness in compliance with the court’s directive that Sowore should open his defence.
While giving evidence, Adeyanju told the court that he personally downloaded a video of President Tinubu, recorded before August 25, 2025, while the President was travelling to Benue State.
According to Adeyanju, President Tinubu said in the video that Nigerians should continue to criticise and even insult him on social media, describing such criticism as part of democratic governance.
He further testified that Tinubu also stated that security agencies and the judiciary should protect citizens’ rights and should not be used to victimise or oppress Nigerians for criticising him or any other public office holder.
Adeyanju also described social media platforms, including X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook, as interactive platforms where users voluntarily express their opinions. He added that users control access to their accounts and, in some instances, must grant permission before others can follow them.
Meanwhile, the prosecution urged the court to revoke Sowore’s bail, arguing that the defendant had not fulfilled all the conditions attached to his release and should therefore be remanded in custody pending compliance.
In response, Olumide-Fusika, SAN, explained that Sowore had travelled to Lagos to retrieve his passport from the United States Embassy. He said officials at the embassy were unable to process the request because of activities marking the U.S. Independence Day celebrations.
According to him, Sowore subsequently authorised another person to collect the passport on his behalf and deliver it to Abuja, stressing that the delay in meeting the bail condition was caused solely by administrative circumstances beyond his client’s control.
Ruling on the issue, Justice Umar said the court would wait until 4:00 p.m. for the bail conditions to be perfected and urged the defence to ensure prompt compliance.
The judge added that the court did not want to create the impression that it was favouring either the prosecution or the defence.
Justice Umar thereafter adjourned the case until Monday, July 13, 2026, for the continuation of the defence.
(SaharaReporters)