The Director-General of the Department of State Services, DSS, Oluwatosin Adeola Ajayi, says the agency deliberately selected the cybercrime prosecution of activist Omoyele Sowore to serve as a deterrent and is seeking stricter enforcement of the Cybercrimes Act, 2024.
Ajayi made the remarks on July 4, 2026, in Abuja during the public presentation of Electronic Evidence, Second Edition and A Compendium of Cases on Electronic Evidence (Volume II, 2020–2025), authored by retired High Court judge Justice Ajileye.
‘We chose a presidential candidate’s case for impact’
Ajayi told the gathering that the DSS is prosecuting several suspects under the Cybercrimes Act, but focused on a few “high-impact” cases to reinforce public confidence and deter others.
He confirmed one of them involves a presidential candidate accused of disparaging a sitting President online. Though he did not name the person in court, the reference is to Sowore, the African Action Congress, AAC, candidate.
“There is one of them who is a presidential candidate and disparaged a sitting President. We chose that one. I can’t talk about him because he is in court,” Ajayi stated.
The DSS is prosecuting Sowore for alleged cyberstalking and criminal defamation over social media posts in which he labelled President Bola Tinubu a “criminal.” The charges also include inciting public disturbance.
A court recently dismissed Sowore’s no-case submission and ordered him to open a defence. He is currently out on a ₦200 million bail bond.
Ajayi argued that convicting even one person would have a wider effect: “If you convict one, that has an impact. Others will be deterred.”
Linking online abuse to national security
The DSS DG warned that cybercrime is not limited to internet fraud. He said unchecked online incitement and “irresponsible digital conduct” could escalate to violence.
“What I know is that if you allow these crimes to go on, you are going to wait for a bigger act. If a man wakes up and says, ‘You are this, you are that,’ and nobody punishes it, somebody will proceed to carry a weapon and kill one of them,” he warned.
He called for greater collaboration among investigators, prosecutors, and the judiciary to ensure offenders receive appropriate punishment under the Cybercrimes Act
Former Nigerian Bar Association President, Wole Olanipekun, SAN, pushed back, urging a judicial review of Section 24 of the Cybercrimes Act — the provision most often cited in online speech cases.
“We are dealing with the Cybercrime Act. We must not leave this place without challenging and interrogating ourselves about that area of our law,” Olanipekun said.
“I must draw attention now to the Cybercrime Act, Section 24. It’s a vital area of our law,” he added, asking legal scholars and judges to examine whether it balances the need to curb cyber-offences with constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression.
Section 24 criminalizes messages that are “grossly offensive,” “false,” or cause “annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, hatred, ill will, or needless anxiety.” Critics argue the language is broad and can be used to target political criticism
EFCC Chairman Ola Olukoyede linked cybercrime and financial crimes to Nigeria’s insecurity and economic problems. He said illicit funds sustain terrorism, kidnapping, and banditry.
“Recently, we had to prosecute close to about 70 people who were involved in helping terrorists and bandits launder ransom. This is the foundation of the problems,” Olukoyede disclosed.
He also cited personal fraud losses, including a judge who allegedly lost ₦7.2 million, saved over six years, to an online scam.
On investigations, Olukoyede said the EFCC has begun using artificial intelligence, but Nigeria lacks a clear legal framework for admitting AI-generated evidence in court. “What I’m cracking my brain about is how to generate evidence and make it admissible,” he said.
Government position on electronic evidence
The Solicitor-General of the Federation, Mrs. Beatrice Ejodamen Jedy-Agba, who represented Attorney-General Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, said electronic evidence is now central to justice.
“In today’s age, where transactions, communications and disputes are increasingly conducted electronically, the ability of our courts to admit and interpret electronic evidence is indispensable to the administration of justice,” she said.
She commended the author of the new evidence books, saying the publications would strengthen jurisprudence on cybercrime and technology-driven offences.
The debate: Deterrence vs. free speech
Ajayi’s comments signal a tougher DSS stance: selecting prominent defendants to send a message, and treating online insults as a security threat.
Olanipekun’s intervention reflects concern among lawyers that Section 24 is too vague and risks chilling legitimate criticism of public officials. The constitutional test will likely be whether courts read the provision narrowly to protect expression while punishing true threats, harassment, or fraud.
- Sowore’s trial: With the no-case submission dismissed, the defence will now present evidence. The outcome could set a precedent for how “insult” and “defamation” are applied to political speech online. If courts or legal scholars take up Olanipekun’s call, we may see clearer guidelines on what speech crosses the line under the Act.
- As agencies deploy AI for investigations, lawmakers will face pressure to legislate standards for admissibility and reliability.
Ajayi’s message was clear: the DSS wants convictions under the Cybercrimes Act to deter others. Whether that approach survives legal and constitutional scrutiny will shape how Nigeria polices online speech going forward.
