DSS arraigns man over call for military coup against Tinubu

The Department of State Services on Monday arraigned a man, Paul Jibrin Oweleke, before the Federal High Court in Lagos for allegedly using social media to call for a military coup to remove President Bola Tinubu from office.

Oweleke was arraigned before Justice Akintoye Aluko on a two-count charge bordering on alleged cybercrime and the transmission of messages said to be capable of inciting public disorder.

When the matter was called, counsel for the DSS, Michael Bajela, informed the court that the prosecution had filed a two-count charge against the defendant and requested that the charges be read to enable him to take his plea.

The charges were subsequently read, and Oweleke pleaded not guilty to both counts.

The DSS alleged that the defendant, through his social media platform known as “Oweleke TV,” published messages and broadcasts calling on the military to overthrow the Tinubu administration and replicate the political developments witnessed in Burkina Faso.

According to the prosecution, the messages were subversive and intended to incite members of the public, cause disaffection and undermine law and order in the country.

Bajela told the court that Oweleke allegedly, on or about May 23, 2025, knowingly transmitted messages and broadcasts through his social media handle, “Oweleke TV,” which the prosecution described as subversive.

The DSS alleged that the messages incited Nigerians and called for a military coup to remove Tinubu in a manner similar to events in Burkina Faso, with the intention of causing disaffection and a breakdown of law and order.

The prosecutor also told the court that Oweleke knowingly transmitted messages through the same social media platform that bullied, threatened or harassed President Tinubu, thereby placing the President and the office of the President in fear of death, violence or bodily harm.

According to the prosecution, the alleged offences contravened Section 24(1)(b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015, as amended in 2024, and is punishable under the same provision and contrary to Section 24(2)(a) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015, as amended in 2024, and punishable under Section 24(2)(c)(i) of the Act.

However, the defendant pleaded not guilty to the charges against him.

Following the plea, Bajela asked the court to fix a date for trial and remand the defendant to correctional custody, pending the determination of the case.

Counsel for the defendant, however, informed the court that he had filed a motion seeking his client’s bail and had served the application on the prosecution.

While stating that he had no objection to the fixing of a trial date, defence counsel said he was prepared to move the bail application if permitted by the court.

Responding, Bajela acknowledged receipt of the application but told the court that it had been served on him shortly before proceedings commenced.

The prosecution said he required time to study the application and file an appropriate response.

After listening to both parties, Justice Aluko adjourned the matter until June 16, 2026, for the hearing of the defendant’s bail application and ordered that he be remanded in custody pending the determination of the application. (Punch)