#Revolution Now Protest: Court To Hear Sowore’s Motion Today

The Federal High Court, Abuja, will, on Wednesday, hear the motion filed by Mr. Omoyele Sowore, Convener, #RevolutionNow protests, challenging his detention for 45 days by the Department of State Security.

Sowore and members of revolution now

Justice Nkeonye Maha of the Federal High Court is expected to hear the matter.

Sowore, who is presently in detention had, on August 9, approached the court, seeking an order to vacate the ex parte order that gave the DSS the legal backing to detain him for 45 days.

News Agency of Nigeria reports that Justice Taiwo Taiwo had, in a ruling on August 8 in an ex parte application, ordered Sowore’s detention for the said period to enable the DSS carry out and conclude its investigation on allegations levied against him.

The DSS had also, on August 20, challenged the court order allowing it to detain Sowore for 45 days, as against its request of 90 days pending investigation.

Sowore, who is the publisher of Sahara Reporters and presidential candidate of the African Action Congress in the February 2019 general elections, was arrested in the early hours of August 4 by the operatives of the DSS in a hotel in Lagos.

He was subsequently moved to Abuja.

The state agency said Sowore was arrested on account of the #RevolutionNow protest which he had spearheaded.

However, in a motion on notice, brought pursuant to sections 6 (6) (B), 35 and 36(4) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, section 293 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 and under the jurisdiction of the court, Sowore asked the court to vacate the order on the grounds that the order was made in violation of his full rights.

The motion filed on August 9 by the human rights lawyer, Mr Femi Falana, SAN, was predicated on 18 grounds and supported by a 24 paragraphs affidavit deposed to by one Marshall Abubakar.

Mr Falana had, on August 22, stormed Court 10 to seek for a date for the hearing of the application.

The lawyer had expressed displeasure over the court’s delay in hearing the motion.