A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Adeboro Adamson, has said the Department of State Services, DSS, cannot unilaterally adjourn the ongoing case involving activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore.
Adamson, who spoke on Arise Television, said the DSS only instructed its counsel to apply for an adjournment to enable Sowore to participate in the 2027 elections.
“I don’t see why this matter should be a subject of discussion at all. The issue of adjournment is at the discretion of the court,” he said.
He explained: “No application has been made to any court for adjournment by the counsel representing DSS or the prosecution. Nobody is talking about suspension here.
“All the DG of DSS did was to inform the lead counsel, the prosecution counsel, to seek an adjournment in court to afford this opportunity to attend to its defence.”
Adamson said the development was connected to preparations for the 2027 elections.
“If you look at this election time, the election for the 2027 presidential election and other elections was declared open on August 20, 2026. All the parties seeking one position or the other must be afforded the opportunity in line with what is internationally called the six-month rule,” he said.
He stressed that the proposal did not amount to withdrawing the case.
“Nobody is saying we are discontinuing. Nobody is saying we want to withdraw. That has not even been applied. DSS advised its lawyer to say, allow this man,” he said.
Adamson cited international instruments including the ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance, the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Reacting to Sowore’s reported rejection of the proposed adjournment, Adamson asked: “What is he rejecting? Has it been placed before the court? It is going to be argued. The parties will appear before the court.”
He said the final decision rested with the court.
“DSS cannot grant adjournments. The appropriate person will make the application. If the opponent is in disagreement, he will object. But the court will look at the application, look at the facts of the case, and decide whether to grant or not to grant,” he said.
On freedom of expression, Adamson said the constitutional right was not absolute.
“You are free to say whatever you want to say, but within the purview of the law. When you act outside the purview of the law or in contravention of the law, then you bear the brunt,” he said.
© 2026, Standard Focus. All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express written permission from STANDARD FOCUS.