Judge rules no breach of fundamental rights, says Facebook acted independently and free speech is not absolute

The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by politician and publisher, Omoyele Sowore, against the Department of State Services (DSS), its Director-General, and Meta Platforms Inc., over the removal of his Facebook post on President Bola Tinubu.

Delivering judgment, Justice Mohammed Umar held that the case lacked merit and resolved all issues for determination against Sowore, refusing to grant any of the reliefs sought. The court subsequently awarded ₦1.5 million in costs against him—₦500,000 each in favour of the DSS, its Director-General, and Meta.

Sowore had approached the court, alleging that Meta, acting on the directive of the DSS, took down his August 26, 2025 Facebook post and deactivated his account after he described President Tinubu as a “criminal.” He argued that the actions violated his rights to fair hearing, freedom of expression, and association.

However, Justice Umar ruled that the claim of breach of fair hearing was misplaced, stressing that such rights apply strictly to judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings.

“The alleged violation does not fall within the scope of Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as the respondents are not judicial bodies,” the judge held, adding that Sowore’s argument on fair hearing was legally unsustainable.

On the issue of freedom of expression, the court emphasised that constitutional rights are not absolute and may be restricted, particularly where they infringe on the rights and reputation of others.

The judge noted that expressions deemed defamatory or disparaging are not protected under the guise of free speech, citing constitutional provisions that allow limitations in such circumstances.

Justice Umar further held that the DSS acted within legal bounds by reporting the content through Facebook’s complaint mechanisms, and that Meta’s decision to remove the post and deactivate the account was based on its own internal policies.

“The action taken by Facebook is independent and guided by its community standards. There is no evidence that the applicant’s rights were violated,” the court ruled.

On the reliefs sought, the judge maintained that Sowore failed to establish his claims with credible evidence, noting that declaratory reliefs must be proven on the strength of the applicant’s case.

“I find no merit in this application,” Justice Umar declared. “The applicant has failed to demonstrate that his constitutional rights were breached or threatened.”

The ruling brings an end to the high-profile legal challenge, reinforcing judicial on the limits of free expression and the autonomy of digital platforms in content moderation.