Nigeria Has No Sufficient Evidence To Prosecute Sowore — American Bar Association

The American Bar Association (ABA), a voluntary bar association
of lawyers and law students, has said that the Nigerian government
does not possess sufficient evidence to prosecute Sahara Reporters
publisher, Omoyele Sowore.

The association has been monitoring the treason trial of Mr
Sowore by the Nigerian government.

The group said this in its preliminary report on criminal
proceedings against Mr Sowore.

The former presidential candidate was arrested alongside another
activist, Olawale Bakare, on August 3 2019, for planning the
#RevolutionNow protest.

The demonstrations were against bad governance and other
issues.

They were charged with treasonable felony, fraud and insulting
President Muhammadu Buhari.

The court granted the duo bail twice but the SSS refused to
release them until December 5.

However, less than 24 hours after it finally obeyed the court
order, the SSS rearrested the two men within the Federal High Court
in Abuja, sparking national outrage.

Mr Sowore was finally released on December 24, 2019 but his
movement has been restricted to Abuja as part of his bail
conditions.

Justifying the action of the SSS, the presidency said Mr
Sowore’s call for revolution was aimed at overthrowing the
democratically elected president of Nigeria.

Several human rights activists, both in Nigeria and in diaspora,
have repeatedly called on the Nigerian government to drop the
charges against the journalist.

However, in a recent report by ABA, the group concluded that the
prosecution never “possessed sufficient evidence on which to
predicate a criminal case against Mr. Sowore.”

The group restated that calls for peaceful protest do not
constitute treason and that the proceedings have violated Mr.
Sowore’s right to freedom of expression, right to freedom of
assembly, and “right to trial without undue delay, as well as best
practices in prosecutorial ethics.”

“The AGF should withdraw the charges or, alternatively, the
Federal High Court should dismiss the case. At the very least, the
court should allow Mr. Sowore to return to the United States and
reunite with his family pending resumption of his trial on January
25,” the group urged.

Citing the basis for its conclusion, ABA explained that Mr.
Sowore had explicitly stated that his calls for revolution were
non-violent and had created a code of conduct forbidding violence
at the August 5 #RevolutionNow demonstrations.

“Indeed, the protest held on August 5 was entirely peaceful.
Second, Mr. Sowore was not notified of the reasons for, or legal
basis of, his arrest at the time it occurred. DSS’s statement to
the press in the immediate aftermath of the arrest vaguely
referenced threats of disorder but did not provide specifics as to
Mr. Sowore’s allegedly criminal behavior.

“Third, following Mr. Sowore’s arrest the DSS sought an ex parte
order – a decision made by a judge without requiring all of the
parties to the dispute to be present – of detention on the basis of
an anti-terrorism statute, arguing that Mr. Sowore should be
detained so as to enable further investigation.

“When Mr. Sowore was charged 48 days later, the offenses alleged
were unrelated to the anti-terrorism statute. This shift suggests
that the statute was but a vehicle for the prosecution to continue
detaining Mr. Sowore until it could figure out what charges to
bring.”

Also, the group emphasised that eight months into the
proceedings, the prosecution dropped five of the seven charges
without explanation, adding that the repeated requests for
adjournment and refusal to share key materials with the defense, is
further indication that the state lacks evidence of anything
against Mr. Sowore.

“Notably, the amended charge sheet, which contains the two
remaining counts of treason and conspiracy to commit treason, does
not set forth any facts to support the allegation that Mr. Sowore
had sought to overthrow the government by unlawful means; it simply
cites Mr. Sowore’s involvement in the #RevolutionNow
demonstrations.”

“Fifth, the conduct of the trial, including the prosecution’s In
light of the above, the DSS and AGF’s pursuit of the case against
Mr. Sowore breaches prosecutorial ethics, which mandate that that
the State drop charges once it becomes apparent that the evidence
is insufficient.

“The facts detailed above likewise give rise to a reasonable
basis to conclude that the case is based on Mr. Sowore’s exercise
of his rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly,” the
report read.

The American Bar Association (ABA), a voluntary bar association
of lawyers and law students, has said that the Nigerian government
does not possess sufficient evidence to prosecute Sahara Reporters
publisher, Omoyele Sowore.

The association has been monitoring the treason trial of Mr
Sowore by the Nigerian government.

The group said this in its preliminary report on criminal
proceedings against Mr Sowore.

The former presidential candidate was arrested alongside another
activist, Olawale Bakare, on August 3 2019, for planning the
#RevolutionNow protest.

The demonstrations were against bad governance and other
issues.

They were charged with treasonable felony, fraud and insulting
President Muhammadu Buhari.

The court granted the duo bail twice but the SSS refused to
release them until December 5.

However, less than 24 hours after it finally obeyed the court
order, the SSS rearrested the two men within the Federal High Court
in Abuja, sparking national outrage.

Mr Sowore was finally released on December 24, 2019 but his
movement has been restricted to Abuja as part of his bail
conditions.

Justifying the action of the SSS, the presidency said Mr
Sowore’s call for revolution was aimed at overthrowing the
democratically elected president of Nigeria.

Several human rights activists, both in Nigeria and in diaspora,
have repeatedly called on the Nigerian government to drop the
charges against the journalist.

However, in a recent report by ABA, the group concluded that the
prosecution never “possessed sufficient evidence on which to
predicate a criminal case against Mr. Sowore.”

The group restated that calls for peaceful protest do not
constitute treason and that the proceedings have violated Mr.
Sowore’s right to freedom of expression, right to freedom of
assembly, and “right to trial without undue delay, as well as best
practices in prosecutorial ethics.”

“The AGF should withdraw the charges or, alternatively, the
Federal High Court should dismiss the case. At the very least, the
court should allow Mr. Sowore to return to the United States and
reunite with his family pending resumption of his trial on January
25,” the group urged.

Citing the basis for its conclusion, ABA explained that Mr.
Sowore had explicitly stated that his calls for revolution were
non-violent and had created a code of conduct forbidding violence
at the August 5 #RevolutionNow demonstrations.

“Indeed, the protest held on August 5 was entirely peaceful.
Second, Mr. Sowore was not notified of the reasons for, or legal
basis of, his arrest at the time it occurred. DSS’s statement to
the press in the immediate aftermath of the arrest vaguely
referenced threats of disorder but did not provide specifics as to
Mr. Sowore’s allegedly criminal behavior.

“Third, following Mr. Sowore’s arrest the DSS sought an ex parte
order – a decision made by a judge without requiring all of the
parties to the dispute to be present – of detention on the basis of
an anti-terrorism statute, arguing that Mr. Sowore should be
detained so as to enable further investigation.

“When Mr. Sowore was charged 48 days later, the offenses alleged
were unrelated to the anti-terrorism statute. This shift suggests
that the statute was but a vehicle for the prosecution to continue
detaining Mr. Sowore until it could figure out what charges to
bring.”

Also, the group emphasised that eight months into the
proceedings, the prosecution dropped five of the seven charges
without explanation, adding that the repeated requests for
adjournment and refusal to share key materials with the defense, is
further indication that the state lacks evidence of anything
against Mr. Sowore.

“Notably, the amended charge sheet, which contains the two
remaining counts of treason and conspiracy to commit treason, does
not set forth any facts to support the allegation that Mr. Sowore
had sought to overthrow the government by unlawful means; it simply
cites Mr. Sowore’s involvement in the #RevolutionNow
demonstrations.”

“Fifth, the conduct of the trial, including the prosecution’s In
light of the above, the DSS and AGF’s pursuit of the case against
Mr. Sowore breaches prosecutorial ethics, which mandate that that
the State drop charges once it becomes apparent that the evidence
is insufficient.

“The facts detailed above likewise give rise to a reasonable
basis to conclude that the case is based on Mr. Sowore’s exercise
of his rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly,” the
report read.