The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) on Friday raised concerns over what it described as an alleged plot to subject activist and African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, to the kind of prolonged prosecution experienced by the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.

 

The rights group said the handling of Sowore’s criminal trial was creating the impression that critics of the government were being treated differently from politically exposed persons facing corruption charges.

 

In a statement signed on Friday by its National Coordinator, Comrade Emmanuel Onwubiko, HURIWA urged the Federal High Court to ensure that the proceedings remained transparent and in line with the constitutional guarantee of fair hearing.

 

The organisation specifically called on the trial judge, Justice Mohammed Umar, to consider recusing himself after Sowore openly expressed a lack of confidence in the court’s impartiality.

 

According to HURIWA, judicial ethics required such concerns to be handled with utmost sensitivity, arguing that assigning the matter to another judge would help preserve public confidence in the judiciary.

 

“We ask a simple question: Is Justice Mohammed Umar the only judge of the Federal High Court in Abuja? If not, why should the judiciary risk the credibility of these proceedings when another judge can hear the matter without the baggage of perceived bias?” the group said.

 

HURIWA also faulted what it described as the unusual speed with which Sowore’s case was being prosecuted, alleging that there had been repeated threats to foreclose his defence.

 

It argued that the pace of the proceedings stood in sharp contrast to several high-profile corruption cases involving politically influential individuals, many of which had remained before the courts for more than a decade.

 

The group cited the cases involving former Abia State Governor, Orji Uzor Kalu, former Benue State Governor, Gabriel Suswam, and former Taraba State Governor, Darius Ishaku, saying those matters had witnessed repeated adjournments without similar judicial urgency.

 

According to HURIWA, the disparity raises constitutional questions about equal treatment before the law.

 

“Why is there extraordinary speed when the accused is a government critic, but extraordinary delay when the defendants are politically connected individuals facing allegations of looting public funds? Justice cannot operate with two different speed limits,” the statement said.

 

The rights group maintained that every Nigerian accused of a crime was entitled to adequate time and opportunity to prepare and present a defence with counsel of their choice, warning that shutting out the defence in a criminal trial should never become a routine judicial response.

 

Drawing parallels with the prosecution of Kanu, HURIWA cautioned against repeating what it described as mistakes that attracted widespread criticism over due process.

 

“Nigeria must not repeat mistakes that erode confidence in the rule of law and project the judiciary as an instrument for silencing dissent,” the group stated.

 

The organisation also appealed to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, to closely monitor the proceedings in the interest of justice and public confidence.

 

It urged the court to ensure that Sowore enjoyed every constitutional safeguard guaranteed under Nigerian law, including the opportunity to fully present his defence without intimidation or undue procedural pressure.

 

HURIWA further reiterated its opposition to the prosecution of Sowore by the Department of State Services (DSS), arguing that democracy flourishes where criticism is tolerated rather than criminalised.

 

The group added that the judiciary must remain above suspicion and demonstrate through its conduct that every Nigerian; whether an opposition figure, activist, former governor or ordinary citizen is entitled to equal justice under the law.