The publisher of Sahara Reporters and former Presidential aspirant, Omoyele Sowore, on Tuesday failed to enter his defence in his ongoing trial over allegations bordering on cyberbullying against President Bola Tinubu.

Sowore’s lawyer, Mr Marshall Abubakar, informed Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court that a letter had been written to the Chief Judge (CJ), Justice John Tsoho, seeking the reassignment of the case.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Sowore is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS) for allegedly making false claims against the person of President Tinubu.

The defendant was accused of referring to the president as “a criminal” in a post he made on his “X” and Facebook accounts.

Justice Umar had, on May 8, dismissed Sowore’s no-case submission and upheld the argument by the DSS’ lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, that a prima facie case had been established against him to warrant his being called upon to enter a defence.

Shortly after the ruling, Sowore and his lawyer, Abubakar, applied orally that the judge should withdraw from further handling the case on grounds of alleged bias.

Following the objection raised by Kehinde that such application are usually made formal to enable the other party respond appropriately, the judge ordered Sowore to file a formal application.

Upon resumed hearing on Tuesday, Abubakar told the court that his client had filed letters and applications to the CJ, demanding a reassignment of the case to another judge.

He said the applications, one filed personally by Sowore and the other by him (the lawyer), were accompanied with affidavits and exhibits containing reasons they made the request.

Responding, Kehinde said he was served on May 19 with the two letters filed by the defence on May 19.

Kehinde argued that what the defence had done was contrary to what the court ordered them to do on the last date, which was to file a formal application to the court on their request for the judge’s recusal.

“All the processes that they have filed are of no moment.

“This was not the directive of the court. We are opposed to all they have done,” he said.

The prosecuting lawyer urged the court not to allow the defence to determine the pace of the proceedings in the case.

He observed that the case had gotten to the stage where the defendant should enter his defence if he had any.

He said he said the defendant should enter his defence and if he does not have, he should tell the court so that the prosecution can make the appropriate application.

In his reply, Abubakar argued that the defence had done the appropriate thing and urged the court not to allow itself to be railroaded into taking steps that are alien to the administration of justice.

The lawyer urged the court to adjourn further proceedings in the case to await the decision of the CJ on the letters.

Justice Umar, in a ruling, ordered the prosecution to file ihis response to the defence’s letters dated May 19 which were addressed to the CJ and also served on the prosecution.

The judge adjourned the matter until June 4 pending the outcome of the petition written by the defence to the CJ. (NAN)

Update news