DSS defends role in Sowore’s remand, orders probe into conduct of operatives

Nigeria’s Department of State Services (DSS) has distanced itself from the circumstances surrounding the remand of African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, in Kuje Correctional Centre, insisting that his detention resulted solely from judicial proceedings and not any action taken by the secret police.

The clarification comes amid growing public criticism following Sowore’s remand on Monday after a court revoked his bail over his failure to appear at a previous hearing in an ongoing cybercrime case linked to alleged defamatory comments against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

In a statement issued on Tuesday by the agency’s Deputy Director of Public Relations and Strategic Communications, Favour Dozie, the DSS acknowledged public concerns over the events that culminated in Sowore’s transfer to Kuje Prison and the manner in which he was escorted by security operatives.

However, the Service maintained that it acted within the confines of the law and had no role in the court’s decision to revoke the activist’s bail.

Responding to reports and videos circulating on social media regarding Sowore’s movement from the court premises to the correctional facility, the DSS disclosed that its Director-General, Tosin Ajayi, had ordered an immediate investigation into the conduct of personnel involved in the incident.

The agency said the review would determine whether any operational guidelines were breached during the process.

According to the DSS, there was a “seeming altercation” involving its operatives and correctional service officials after the court proceedings. The Service claimed that Sowore eventually chose to be transported to Kuje Prison in a DSS vehicle.

The agency stressed that professionalism and civility remain central to its operations and pledged to uphold those standards throughout the investigation.

READ ALSO: HURIWA faults Sowore’s remand, demands withdrawal of cybercrime charges

The DSS is prosecuting Sowore over comments he allegedly made on his X (formerly Twitter) and Facebook accounts on August 25, 2025, in which he reportedly referred to President Tinubu as “a criminal.”

According to the Service, the comments formed the basis of charges filed under Section 24 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024.

The agency said it did not immediately seek Sowore’s arrest following the publication. Instead, it claimed to have written to him on September 4, 2025, requesting that he retract the statements within one week.

The DSS stated that the approach reflected a policy under the current leadership to resolve disputes through dialogue and voluntary compliance before resorting to legal action.

“When a retraction was not made, the Service sought judicial interpretation regarding the legality of the statements and whether they constituted cyberbullying or unlawful disparagement of the President,” the statement said.

In defending its actions, the DSS pointed to previous instances where it pursued legal remedies rather than arrests.

The agency cited its challenge against the “Shadow Government” initiative promoted by political economist and activist Prof. Pat Utomi, noting that it sought judicial clarification without first arresting or inviting the professor for questioning. The Federal High Court subsequently ruled against the initiative.

The DSS also referenced disputes involving media reports alleging invasions of the Lagos State House of Assembly and the National Assembly Complex by DSS operatives. According to the Service, it demanded public apologies rather than making arrests, and later withdrew legal actions after retractions were issued.

Additionally, the agency recalled separate defamation and libel cases filed by two DSS operatives against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), stating that the courts ruled in favour of the officers.

“These examples demonstrate the Service’s commitment to lawful processes, institutional discipline and adherence to the rule of law,” the statement noted.

The DSS further emphasized that Sowore had initially been granted bail on self-recognition without the requirement of a surety and that it did not oppose his bail application.

According to the agency, Sowore publicly commended the development at the time.

The Service argued that the revocation of the activist’s bail and his subsequent remand were matters strictly within the jurisdiction of the court.

“From the foregoing, it is clear that the issues that led to his bail revocation and subsequent remand were entirely premised on court processes, as the Service neither arrested him nor opposed his bail,” the DSS said.

The agency reiterated its commitment to professionalism and lawful conduct, even in situations involving criticism and provocation.

Meanwhile, Sowore is expected to return to court for the hearing of his application seeking the reversal of the order revoking his bail.

The case continues to attract widespread public attention, with civil society groups, political activists and legal observers closely monitoring developments due to its implications for freedom of expression, cybercrime legislation and the relationship between government institutions and political dissent in Nigeria.