The legal counsel to the Department of State Services (DSS), Fidelis Adedipe, has defended the agency’s prosecution of activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore, insisting that there is “a thin line between freedom of expression and committing an offence” and maintaining that the DSS acted within the confines of the law.
Speaking during an interview with Arise News on Thursday, Adedipe responded to allegations made by Sowore during an earlier appearance on the programme, where the activist accused the DSS of abusing its powers by arresting, detaining and prosecuting him over comments critical of President Bola Tinubu. Adedipe said the agency’s actions followed an investigation and were based on what it considered to be a breach of the law.
According to Adedipe, the issue was not simply that Sowore criticised the President, but that he referred to him as “a criminal.”
“First of all, I think Mr. Sowore got some things mixed up, basically because there’s a thin line between freedom of expression and committing an offense. Mr. Sowore tweeted and called the president a criminal. I think that’s a joke taken a bit too far. We may not like the occupant of the office of the president, but that office ought to be respected.”
He added that Sowore was asked to remove the social media post but declined to do so.
“He was asked to take down that tweet, which he refused. After several occasions, the DSS decided to charge him to court.”
Addressing questions about constitutional protections for free speech, Adedipe argued that freedom of expression is not absolute and may be restricted where national security or public order is at stake.
“There is nowhere in the world where freedom of expression is absolute.”
Drawing comparisons with other jurisdictions, he said governments are empowered to limit certain forms of expression where they could threaten peace and public order.
When asked whether calling the President a criminal was enough to warrant criminal prosecution, Adedipe maintained that the matter constituted criminal defamation rather than mere political criticism.
“It’s not just because he called the president. It could be anybody. It’s a criminal defamation case. So that is why he was prosecuted.”
The DSS counsel also declined to comment extensively on legal issues already before the courts, repeatedly noting that the matter is sub judice and should be determined by the judiciary.
“The court should be in a better position to decide and determine whether or not the case falls under a civil defamation rather than a criminal defamation case. But I believe that the DSS is still within its rights and they have done the right thing.”
Responding to criticism that the agency may be discouraging political expression, Adedipe insisted the DSS acted lawfully and pointed to Sowore’s release on self-recognition bail as evidence of respect for due process.
“Even though Mr. Sowore castigated the DSS, said so many things about them, he was granted bail on self-recognition. And that was done because this government believes in the rule of law.”
Adedipe further argued that the DSS has the legal authority to investigate and prosecute cases it believes could threaten public peace, while stressing that the courts would ultimately determine whether any offence had been committed.
On concerns about the implications of the case for Nigerians wishing to criticise public officials, Adedipe reiterated that there remains a legal boundary between protected speech and conduct that may attract prosecution.
“There is a very thin line between freedom of speech and the commission of a crime.”
He concluded that, in his view, Sowore crossed that line by calling the President a criminal despite opportunities to withdraw the statement, leaving the courts to determine the outcome of the case.
Ademide Adebayo
Follow us on:
