The Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) has strongly condemned the alleged forceful removal of human rights activist and former presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, by operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS) from the premises of the Federal High Court in Abuja.
In a statement issued by its Executive Director, Okechukwu Nwanguma, the organisation described the incident as a “vengeful, lawless and undemocratic assault on the rule of law,” warning that such actions could undermine public confidence in Nigeria’s justice system.
According to reports cited by the group, DSS operatives allegedly overpowered and removed Sowore from the court premises on June 22, 2026, shortly after Justice Mohammed Umar ordered that he be remanded in the custody of the Nigerian Correctional Service pending the hearing of an application for a stay of execution of an order revoking his bail.
“If these reports are accurate, the actions of the DSS represent a brazen affront to the authority of the court, a dangerous violation of due process, and a deeply troubling display of institutional lawlessness,” Nwanguma said.
“A courtroom is the very symbol of justice and the rule of law. For security operatives to allegedly invade that space and seize a litigant contrary to the apparent terms of a court order amounts to contempt for judicial authority and an attack on constitutional democracy.”
RULAAC also expressed concern over reports that Sowore sustained injuries during the incident, describing the alleged use of force against a non-violent defendant as troubling.
“The use of force against a non-violent defendant who voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court raises serious questions about the motive behind the operation. Such conduct bears the hallmarks of vindictiveness and abuse of power rather than lawful law enforcement,” Nwanguma stated.
The organisation noted that the incident recalled previous instances in which security agencies were accused of disregarding court orders in politically sensitive cases.
“Such conduct damages public confidence in the justice system and reinforces the perception that certain state institutions operate above the law,” the statement said.
RULAAC stressed that the DSS, as a statutory institution, is bound by the Constitution and laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and cannot exercise powers beyond those granted by law.
“Where a court has issued a lawful order regarding the custody of a defendant, every agency of government is bound to comply unless and until that order is set aside by a superior court,” Nwanguma said.
The rights advocacy group warned that any disregard for judicial orders could signal growing executive overreach and intolerance of dissent.
“Democracy cannot thrive where critics of government are subjected to arbitrary treatment, selective prosecution, intimidation, or extra-legal measures. The criminal justice system must never be weaponised to settle political scores or silence dissenting voices,” he added.
RULAAC called on the DSS to provide an immediate explanation regarding the legal basis for its actions and demanded a thorough and independent investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged removal and injury of Sowore.
The group also urged strict compliance with court orders by all security agencies, accountability for any officials found to have acted unlawfully, and respect for the rights of citizens regardless of their political views.
“Nigeria’s democratic credentials are measured not by how it treats those who support those in power, but by how it treats those who criticise them,” Nwanguma said.
“The rule of law requires that state institutions act within the limits of their legal authority and remain subject to judicial oversight.”
RULAAC further called on the Federal Government, the leadership of the DSS, the Nigerian Bar Association, the National Human Rights Commission, civil society groups, and other stakeholders to defend judicial independence and due process.
“No democracy can endure where security agencies become arbiters of judicial decisions. The courtroom must remain a sanctuary of justice, not a theatre of intimidation,” the statement concluded.
