The agency is expected to ask the Federal High Court to pause the cybercrime proceedings against the AAC candidate during the presidential campaign

The Department of State Services (DSS) has directed its private counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Akinlolu Kehinde, to seek a suspension of the cybercrime case against African Action Congress presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore until after the 2027 presidential election.

Also read: Peter Obi Raises Concern Over Sowore’s Remand

The reported decision followed a meeting on August 20, 2026, between DSS Director-General Tosin Ajayi, Kehinde and senior officials of the agency’s legal directorate, according to a source familiar with the discussions.

The development comes shortly after the Independent National Electoral Commission commenced the 2027 presidential campaign period, placing Sowore’s ongoing court proceedings against the backdrop of an increasingly active election season.

According to the source, Ajayi told the legal team that pausing the proceedings would allow Sowore to participate fully in the presidential election without the case becoming an impediment to his campaign.

“The DSS boss reportedly told the Senior Advocate and his directorate of legal services that, with the commencement of presidential campaigns, it would only be fair to pause the court case in order to enable Sowore fully participate in the upcoming elections without let or hindrance,” the source said.

The source added that Ajayi considered a temporary pause reasonable because the case had already been before the court for almost a year.

“The DSS boss told the lawyers that, since the matter had been in court for nearly a year, suspending it for another four months wouldn’t make much difference,” the source said.

The DSS suspends Sowore case development is expected to be formally presented to the Federal High Court in Abuja when regular proceedings resume after the annual judicial vacation. The source said the agency is expected to communicate its position from September 14, 2026.

If the court grants the request, the proceedings would remain in abeyance through the main period of the presidential campaign and the January 16, 2027 presidential election.

The case originated from social media posts made by Sowore on August 25 and 26, 2025, in which he described President Bola Ahmed Tinubu as a “criminal” while reacting to the President’s comments about corruption during a visit to Brazil.

The DSS subsequently demanded that Sowore remove the posts and apologise. After he declined, the agency instituted criminal proceedings at the Federal High Court in Abuja in September 2025. (channelstv.com)

The amended case centres on alleged cyberstalking and related offences under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act 2024.

The prosecution argued that the posts were false and capable of causing a breakdown of law and order, while Sowore has maintained his opposition to the allegations.

The case has already gone through several stages of litigation.

In January 2026, the Federal High Court admitted screenshots of Sowore’s social media posts and related evidence tendered by the DSS, despite objections from the defence. (tribuneonlineng.com)

In May, Justice Mohammed Garba Umar dismissed Sowore’s no-case submission, ruling that the prosecution had established a prima facie case requiring the AAC candidate to enter his defence. (channelstv.com)

The court subsequently moved the case towards the defence stage.

In June, however, Justice Umar issued a bench warrant for Sowore after neither the defendant nor his lawyer appeared when the case was called. The court also revoked his bail at the time. (premiumtimesng.com)

The proceedings continued to attract controversy in July, when the court rejected Sowore’s request for a lengthy adjournment to accommodate the annual judicial vacation. DSS counsel Kehinde had opposed that application, pointing to the number of previous adjournments in the matter. (channelstv.com)

The latest development therefore represents a significant change in the prosecution’s position.

The same DSS counsel who previously opposed an extended adjournment is now expected to ask the court to pause the proceedings, although the reported decision remains subject to the court’s consideration.

The timing is also politically significant.

Sowore is seeking to challenge for the presidency in the 2027 election as the AAC candidate, meaning the continuation of a criminal case involving the candidate during the campaign could have generated an unusual intersection between criminal proceedings and electoral politics.

The reported decision by the DSS appears designed to avoid that situation, although the agency has yet to make a public formal announcement on the proposed suspension.

The case has also raised broader questions about the balance between state security powers, freedom of expression and political participation.

For the DSS, the original proceedings were presented as an attempt to obtain judicial determination over the legality of allegedly defamatory and inflammatory statements made against the President.

For Sowore and his supporters, the prosecution has been viewed against the wider backdrop of his longstanding criticism of the Tinubu administration.

The court has not determined that Sowore is guilty of the offences alleged against him. The dismissal of his no-case submission merely established that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence for him to be called upon to defend himself.

The reported move to pause the proceedings now offers the case a potentially quieter chapter as Nigeria enters a consequential election period.

For Sowore, it could provide greater freedom to concentrate on his presidential campaign. For the DSS, it could remove the appearance of pursuing a presidential candidate through active criminal proceedings while he seeks votes across the country.

The final decision, however, rests with the Federal High Court.

Also read: Sowore Remanded in Kuje Prison Over Cybercrime Charge

Until the court formally considers and grants any application, the proceedings remain active and the reported directive should be understood as the DSS’s intended next step rather than a completed judicial suspension.