In a significant revelation at the Federal High Court in Abuja, an investigating officer with the Department of State Services (DSS), Michael Jego, admitted during cross-examination that the security agency possesses no formal investigation report regarding allegations of cyberbullying leveled against human rights activist and politician Omoyele Sowore.
The disclosure emerged during Monday’s proceedings in the ongoing trial where Sowore, the presidential candidate for the African Action Congress (AAC), faces charges alleging he targeted President Bola Tinubu in online publications.
Defense Cross-Examination Exposes Procedural Gaps
Led in evidence by defense counsel Olumide Fusika (SAN), the DSS operative was questioned regarding the agency's internal workflow and evidence-gathering methods prior to issuing formal demand letters and filing charges.
When pressed on whether a concluded report detailing forensic findings, threat assessments, or risk analyses to public order had been compiled by the investigating team, the witness conceded that no such document was prepared or submitted as part of the official case file.
Key admissions highlighted during Monday's session include:
Absence of Written Findings: The agency relied on direct social media downloads and digital extractions without an accompanying formal investigative summary.
Demand for Retraction: The court examined the basis upon which the DSS previously issued a directive compelling Sowore to retract his publication, with the defense asserting that the directive lacked a foundational investigative report.
Court Dismisses Subpoena to Compel DSS Director-General
Earlier during Monday’s sitting, Justice Mohammed Garba Umar dismissed an application filed by Sowore’s legal team seeking to compel the Director-General of the State Security Service, Oluwatosin Ajayi, to appear personally as a witness.
In his ruling, Justice Umar held that the testimony sought concerned official acts performed by the security agency rather than personal actions of the Director-General.
Legal Analysis: Procedural Rigor vs. Prosecution Requirements
Aviation and legal observers tracking state prosecutions note that the absence of a structured investigation report raises critical procedural questions regarding trial standards in cybercrime prosecutions.
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| Evidentiary Requirement | Standard Legal Practice in Cybercrime Cases | Status in DSS vs. Sowore Trial |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| Forensic Investigation Report | Mandatory written audit detailing digital chain | Absent; witness admitted no written report exists. |
| | of custody, analysis, and conclusions. | |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| Threat to Public Order Assessment | Written documentation demonstrating actionable risk | Based on agency discretion without filed written |
| | or clear breach of peace. | threat analysis. |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| Witness Representation | Case officers and forensic examiners testify on | Investigating officer testified following court |
| | technical findings. | ruling declining subpoena of DSS DG. |
+-----------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------------------------+
The trial has been adjourned as the court continues hearing testimony from additional defense witnesses and evaluating the admissibility of digital exhibits.
No comments:
Post a Comment