Publisher of Sahara Reporters, Omoyele Sowore, on Tuesday withdrew his request to compel the Director-General of the Department of State Services, Oluwatosin Ajayi, to testify in his defence in the ongoing criminal defamation case against him.
Sowore’s lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika (SAN), announced the decision shortly before proceedings ended before Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The News Agency of Nigeria reported that Sowore is being prosecuted over alleged defamatory comments in which he described President Bola Tinubu as “a criminal” in posts published on his X and Facebook accounts.
The allegations led to charges of criminal defamation, cyberstalking and incitement being filed against the African Action Congress presidential candidate.
Earlier in the trial, on July 22, Olumide-Fusika disclosed plans to obtain a subpoena compelling the DSS boss to appear in court and produce a letter dated September 7, 2025, requesting Sowore to retract the alleged defamatory publications about Tinubu.
The senior lawyer argued that the move became necessary after DSS official Uwem Davies, who testified as the second defence witness under subpoena, could not sufficiently answer questions concerning the letter.
According to him, Davies admitted that he wrote the letter on the directive of the DSS Director-General, making Ajayi’s testimony necessary to clarify the circumstances surrounding the document.
However, events took a different turn during Tuesday’s proceedings after arguments erupted over the appearance of the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), who personally announced his appearance for the prosecution.
When the matter was called, Olumide-Fusika reminded the court that the case had been fixed for continuation of the defence but noted the presence of both the AGF and Director of Public Prosecutions, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN).
According to him, I don’t know if there is a reason why they are here.
“So what do you want me to say? I hope you are not intimidated?” Justice Umar asked.
“I am my lord,” Olumide-Fusika responded in a lighter mood.
After confirming he was ready to proceed, the defence lawyer informed the court that, “our next witness is a subpoenaed witness, the DG of DSS, Oluwatosin Ajayi, who holds the position.”
Fagbemi immediately challenged the validity of the subpoena, arguing that it was incompetent and constituted an abuse of court process.
He maintained that the subpoena had not been personally served on Ajayi as required by law and further noted that the application failed to specify the date on which the DSS chief was expected to appear in court.
The AGF also pointed out that the September 7, 2025 letter had already been admitted into evidence on two separate occasions, making the request unnecessary.
“As a matter of record, this document has been tendered and marked Exhibit D. It was also tendered as Exhibit DWC on July 22, 2026. It was tendered by the defendant,” Fagbemi said.
While acknowledging that the defence had the constitutional right to seek a subpoena, Fagbemi argued that such powers were not without limits.
“It is worth hearing that the document in contention was authored by DW-2 (Davies).
“The matter in contention is an official matter.
“The DG of the DSS is not being subpoenaed to come in his personal capacity.
“He is being subpoenaed in his official capacity to give evidence in respect of an official letter.
“It is not about his person or any allegations against him. So, there are limits.”
He urged the court to dismiss the subpoena application and direct the defence to continue with its case, insisting the application was intended to delay proceedings since the DSS had already made one of its officials available to testify.
Olumide-Fusika, however, objected to the AGF’s participation, arguing that Fagbemi ought to have formally filed a notice before taking over the prosecution from Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), who had previously handled the matter.
“What AGF has done today is to appear and make submissions.
“We are entitled to be notified that he is taking over the prosecution of the case from the lawyer that filed the charge and has been appearing,” Olumide-Fusika insisted.
He requested permission to respond to a legal authority cited by the AGF and urged the court to disregard his submissions.
“He (AGF) is not in the matter. He did not file the proper notice that he was taking over the case,” he added.
Before the court could fix a date for further arguments, Fagbemi invited the defence counsel for a brief private discussion.
Following the meeting, the AGF informed the court that Olumide-Fusika had abandoned his earlier insistence that Ajayi must personally testify, adding that the defence was now willing to have any authorised DSS official answer questions relating to the September 7, 2025 letter.
Both senior lawyers subsequently agreed that the development had rendered their earlier arguments unnecessary, making a ruling on the issue unnecessary.
Justice Umar thereafter adjourned the case until August 3 for a DSS official to appear in compliance with the subpoena earlier issued in connection with the Director-General.
