DSS Demands X Remove Sowore’s Anti-Tinubu Tweet, Citing National Security Threats
Trending: Free Speech Clashes with State Security in Nigeria
In a move that has reignited debates over freedom of expression and government overreach, Nigeria’s Department of State Services (DSS) has formally petitioned X (formerly Twitter), demanding the immediate removal of a tweet by prominent activist and politician Omoyele Sowore. The September 6, 2025, letter accuses the post of spreading “fake news,” hate speech, and incitement, potentially threatening national security by tarnishing President Bola Tinubu’s image. Sowore, a vocal critic of the administration, has fired back, vowing legal action and labeling the demand as an assault on democracy. As X faces a 24-hour deadline, the incident evokes memories of Nigeria’s 2021 Twitter ban, raising fears of renewed platform restrictions amid escalating political tensions.
The Controversial Tweet and DSS’s Demands
The tweet in question, posted by Sowore on August 25, 2025, via his verified account @YeleSowore, criticized President Tinubu during his state visit to Brazil. Accompanying a video of Tinubu claiming “there is no more corruption under his regime in Nigeria,” Sowore wrote: “This criminal @officialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is no more corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!”
In a letter dated September 6 and signed by B. Bamigboye on behalf of DSS Director-General Yusuf Bichi, the agency described the post as “false, harassing, and a deliberate attempt to promote a dangerous ideology.” It argued that the tweet, directed at Tinubu’s official account @officialABAT, could incite unrest among the president’s supporters, who have reportedly begun street protests in response. The DSS claimed the content violates Section 51 of the Criminal Code Act, provisions of the Cyber Crimes Act 2025, and the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act 2022, amounting to spreading fake news, online harassment, and promoting disunity.
The letter instructed X’s chairman and CEO to delete the tweet and any related reposts within 24 hours, warning of “far-reaching, sweeping and across-the-board measures” by the Federal Government if ignored. It further alleged the post breaches X’s transparency policies by being “false, harmful, and a violation of privacy,” potentially damaging Nigeria’s international reputation.
Sowore’s Defiant Response
Sowore, the 2023 presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC) and founder of the #RevolutionNow movement, reacted swiftly on X, calling the DSS’s action “an attempt to muzzle dissent and silence critics.” In a statement shared via his platform Sahara Reporters, he accused the government of hypocrisy: “They want to censor me for calling out lies, but they ignore real corruption scandals. This is tyranny, not security.” Sowore announced plans to challenge the demand legally, stating, “I will not be intimidated. Nigerians deserve the truth, and no DSS letter will stop that.”
His supporters rallied online, with #FreeSowore and #DefendFreeSpeech trending in Nigeria, amassing over 100,000 posts by September 8. Civil society groups like the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) condemned the move, urging X to resist and warning of a “chilling effect” on online activism.
Background: Sowore’s History of Clashes with the State
Omoyele Sowore, a journalist and rights activist, has long been a thorn in the side of Nigerian authorities. Arrested in August 2019 for organizing #RevolutionNow protests against then-President Muhammadu Buhari, he spent five months in DSS custody on treason charges before being released on bail. The case, widely criticized internationally, was eventually struck out in 2021. Sowore’s activism, amplified through Sahara Reporters and social media, often targets corruption and human rights abuses, earning him both acclaim and enmity.
This incident mirrors Nigeria’s fraught relationship with social media. In June 2021, the Buhari administration suspended Twitter after the platform deleted his post threatening to treat secessionists as terrorists—a ban that lasted 18 months and drew global backlash. The reversal in January 2022 came after X agreed to establish a local office and comply with certain content rules. Critics fear the DSS’s latest demand could signal renewed pressure on X, especially amid 2027 election jockeying.
Nigeria’s Cyber Crimes Act 2025, an update to the 2015 version, empowers authorities to demand content removal for “national security” reasons, but it has been decried by Amnesty International as a tool for suppressing dissent.
Possible Impact and Next Steps
If X complies, it could set a precedent for increased self-censorship, emboldening further government interventions and stifling opposition voices ahead of elections. Non-compliance might lead to fines, access blocks, or legal battles against X in Nigerian courts. The platform has not yet responded publicly, but past patterns suggest it may engage diplomatically while prioritizing user rights.
Sowore plans to file a lawsuit in the Federal High Court, seeking to declare the DSS demand unconstitutional under Nigeria’s freedom of expression guarantees in Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution. Human rights lawyers, including Femi Falana, have offered pro bono support. Internationally, the U.S. Embassy in Abuja and the EU delegation expressed “concern” over the development, urging respect for digital freedoms.
For Nigerians, monitoring tools like SERAP’s reporting hotline (08000052560) can document similar incidents. X users are advised to archive controversial posts and use VPNs for access if restrictions emerge.
Conclusion: A Test for Digital Rights in Nigeria
The DSS’s demand for X to remove Sowore’s tweet marks a tense standoff between state security claims and free speech, echoing Nigeria’s turbulent history with social media. Sowore’s unyielding stance and public backlash offer hope for resistance, but the outcome could reshape online discourse. The takeaway for Nigerians and global observers: in an era of digital activism, vigilance against censorship is essential—support independent journalism, amplify dissenting voices, and hold platforms accountable to protect democracy’s fragile pulse.