Sowore’s request to subpoena our lawyer as witness ploy to delay trial – DSS

By Taiye Agbaje

The Department of State Services (DSS) has told the Federal High Court in Abuja that an application by Omoyele Sowore, publisher of Sahara Reporters, to subpoena its lead counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, as defence witness in his ongoing trial on alleged cyberbullying offence was a ploy to delay trial.

The DSS, through its lawyer, Kenneth Cyril-Ita, told Justice Mohammed Umar that the subpoena was in bad faith and strange in law, especially in a criminal trial.

It further argued that under Section 192 of the Evidence Act, no legal practitioner is permitted to disclose any communication made to him in the course of his engagement unless with the consent of his client.

The DSS added that Sowore’s subpoena was an abuse of court process calculated to annoy and irritate its lead counsel.

Cyril-Ita, therefore, asked the court to set aside the subpoena issued against Kehinde by Sowore, the presidential candidate of the African Action Congress (AAC).

Sowore, through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide Fusika, SAN, had served a subpoena on the DSS’ lead counsel to appear in court to give evidence in respect of the trial of the defendant for allegedly cyberbullying President Bola Tinubu.

In his motion on notice against the execution of the subpoena, Cyril-Ita told the court that the evidence sought to be given through the subpoena witness is irrelevant to Sowore’s alleged cyberbullying trial.

The lawyer said contrary to Sowore’s claim, there was no application before the court to suspend or adjourn the trial till 2027.

“By not setting aside the subpoena, the court is being invited to deprive the Federal Republic of Nigeria, a counsel of its choice in the prosecution of the matter as counsel cannot be a witness and counsel at the same time in the same matter,” he stated.

According to him, the evidence of whether the complainant will ask for adjournment or not in the matter as shown in the publication sought to be tendered is a matter allegedly caught by Section 83(3) of the Evidence Act.

He, therefore, urged Justice Umar to set aside the subpoena and direct Sowore to continue his defence in the charges against him.

In his argument, Reuben Adakole, who represented Sowore, asked the court to uphold the subpoena against the DSS lead counsel as requested by the defendant to aide his defence.

After listening to parties, Justice Umar adjourned the matter until Nov. 9 for ruling.

NAN)