Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu, has commended Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, counsel to human rights activist and African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore, for his thorough preparation and incisive cross-examination of a Department of State Services (DSS) witness in the ongoing trial of the activist at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Ikpeazu praised Olumide-Fusika’s handling of the testimony of Michael Jego, the DSS representative who appeared as a prosecution witness, describing the defence lawyer’s performance as worthy of recognition.
He also suggested that a larger courtroom should have been provided to accommodate younger lawyers interested in observing the proceedings and learning from Olumide-Fusika’s courtroom performance.
The commendation comes amid heightened attention surrounding Sowore’s trial over his alleged description of President Bola Tinubu as a criminal, with the proceedings featuring disputes between the prosecution and defence over the presentation of evidence and the appearance of key DSS officials.
A major point of contention in the case is whether the Director-General of the DSS, Oluwatosin Ajayi, should personally appear before the court to testify or whether another authorised officer of the agency can give evidence on his behalf.
The dispute arose after the defence insisted that Ajayi must appear personally because his name was specifically stated in a subpoena issued in connection with the case.
At an earlier sitting, Olumide-Fusika accused the prosecution of reneging on an understanding allegedly reached with the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, concerning the appearance of another DSS officer on behalf of the agency’s director-general.
Addressing the court, Olumide-Fusika argued that the arrangement had been mutually agreed upon but was subsequently abandoned by the prosecution.
“My Lord, that was an understanding between gentlemen, ordinarily binding. That understanding was repudiated by the person charged with the prosecution of this case at the last adjourned date,” he told the court.
The defence counsel maintained that the prosecution could not unilaterally abandon the alleged agreement and substitute another witness without formally addressing the issue before the court.
Emphasising his objection, Olumide-Fusika insisted that Ajayi’s name remained on the subpoena and that the director-general should therefore honour the summons.
“He was named specifically to come, and the subpoena still names him specifically. So he must come now, having repudiated the understanding,” he said.
However, prosecution counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, opposed the defence’s demand, arguing that Ajayi had been summoned in his official capacity as head of the DSS rather than in a personal capacity.
Kehinde maintained that the director-general had no personal interest in the matter and that an authorised officer of the agency could represent the DSS in giving evidence.
“He does not have a personal interest in this matter. There is no personal interest whatsoever,” the prosecution counsel submitted.
He subsequently urged the court to allow the DSS officer who was present to testify on behalf of the agency, challenging the defence’s insistence on Ajayi’s personal appearance.
Following the arguments, the court scheduled October 6, 2026, to deliver its ruling on the dispute. However, the decision was not delivered after the trial judge, Justice Umar Mohammad, was absent from court following a bereavement.
The matter was subsequently adjourned until October 19, 2026, for further proceedings.
The disagreement over Ajayi’s appearance has emerged as a significant procedural issue in the prosecution of Sowore, with the defence insisting that the terms of the subpoena must be respected, while the prosecution maintains that the DSS can be represented by an authorised officer.
Sowore is being prosecuted over his alleged description of President Tinubu as a criminal, an expression that has featured prominently in the case and drawn public attention to the boundaries of political expression and the prosecution’s handling of the matter.
The defence has continued to challenge aspects of the prosecution’s evidence and the manner in which witnesses are presented, while the prosecution maintains its position on how the DSS should provide testimony.
Ikpeazu’s commendation of Olumide-Fusika has added another dimension to the proceedings, drawing attention to the defence lawyer’s preparation and courtroom advocacy, as well as the educational value of observing experienced legal practitioners handle complex litigation.
With the matter listed for further proceedings on October 19, 2026, attention is expected to remain focused on the court’s handling of the outstanding dispute over Ajayi’s appearance and the continuation of evidence in the trial.
The proceedings remain ongoing before the Federal High Court in Abuja.