By Danjuma Lamido
My attention was drawn to a recent publication by Sahara Reporters titled “Sowore’s Legal Team Demands Dismissal Of Police Charge Built On Repealed Cybercrime Law; Court Adjourns Case To February 2026.”
As someone who has followed the matter closely and believes strongly in the importance of accuracy, especially when legal processes and public advocacy are involved, I consider it necessary to offer essential clarifications for the benefit of the public.
First, it must be stated clearly that the case “COP FCT Command v. Omoyele Sowore and Sahara Reporters” is not new. It was first filed in 2022, and its recent mention in court is part of the ongoing proceedings.
The case came up again during the continuation of their public advocacy for transparency, accountability, and the rule of law. There is, therefore, nothing unusual or suspicious about the matter appearing on the court’s docket in 2025.
Now, to the core legal issue raised by Sowore’s legal team, the claim that Section 24(1)(b) of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention) Act “was amended and repealed by parliament in 2024.”
This interpretation, with respect, is misleading.
What the 2024 Amendment Actually Did
Based on the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, Section 24(1)(a) and (b) of the original 2015 Act were not repealed in the sense of being deleted or removed from the law.
Instead, they were replaced with a more refined and narrowed Section 24(1). The lawmakers did not abolish the section; they rewrote it to limit abuses and to conform to constitutional protections.
The revised Section 24(1) now provides (in summary) that:
Any person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer systems or a network that—
(a) is pornographic, or
(b) he knows to be false, for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order, posing a threat to life, or causing such a message to be sent,
commits an offence.
In other words:
- The 2015 Section 24(1)(b) is not “repealed” in the sense of being discarded.
- It is replaced by a stricter version that now criminalises only false messages with clear malicious intent, not broad categories of “annoying”, “insulting”, or “offensive” content, which were rightly criticised.
Thus, if by “repealed” one means that the previous broad wording of Section 24 no longer applies, that is correct.
But if the claim is that Section 24 has been deleted from Nigerian law, that is incorrect. The section remains in a refined and constitutionally cleaner form.
Context Behind the Police Allegation
The public should also recall that the police allegation against Sowore emanates from his intervention in the 2022 case involving popular influencer Jaruma, who was detained following complaints made by politician Ned Nwoko. The police maintain that certain publications and communications during that episode formed the basis of the charge.
Whether the allegations are justified or not is for the court to determine, and that is exactly why the matter is still before the court.
A Necessary Clarification on Judicial Process
It is important to emphasise that the continued pursuit of the case by the police does not amount to an abuse of judicial process, contrary to certain insinuations.
A case initiated in 2022 does not evaporate simply because a law has been amended—especially when the amendment does not erase the offence but merely refines its scope.
The defence is well within its rights to challenge the charge.
The prosecution is well within its rights to argue otherwise.
And the court is the final arbiter.
What is crucial is that public commentary on the matter is accurate, fair, and grounded in the actual state of the law.
As citizens committed to the rule of law, our responsibility is not only to demand justice but also to ensure that public conversations around sensitive legal issues remain factual, balanced, and free from sensational distortions.
Danjuma Lamido writes from Yola, Adamawa State. email: danjumalamido2011@gmail.com
