In a move that has set Nigeria’s online public square ablaze, the Department of State Services (DSS) on Saturday wrote to X Corp. demanding the immediate removal of a tweet by activist-politician Omoyele Sowore, giving the platform 24 hours to comply and warning of “far-reaching, sweeping” measures if it refused.
The letter, signed by a B. Bamigboye on behalf of the Director-General — framed the post as “misleading information,” “online harassment,” and a threat to national security.
The offending post, published on 25 August 2025, aired a blunt indictment of President Bola Tinubu after a public comment during a state visit to Brazil.
Sowore wrote: “This criminal @officialABAT actually went to Brazil to state that there is NO MORE corruption under his regime in Nigeria. What audacity to lie shamelessly!” — language the DSS says “could provoke unrest” and has already attracted “widespread condemnation.”
Sowore: “Not Deleting. Not today”
Sahara Reporters founder and activist Sowore publicly vowed not to delete the post. He says X has contacted him about the DSS request and that he will defend his words as legitimate criticism, not criminality.
Sowore’s refusal has crystallised the crisis: a human-rights veteran standing across from a powerful intelligence agency, and a global tech platform caught in the crossfire.
X’s status in Nigeria is not hypothetical. In 2021 the government suspended Twitter for months after a dispute; regulators and officials have used that precedent as leverage in past showdowns with global platforms.
The DSS letter makes plain the threat this time: comply, or “the Federal Government will be compelled to take far-reaching, sweeping and across-the-board measures.”
What The DSS Says — National Security, Hate Speech And “Misleading Information”
The intelligence agency argues the post is more than insult: it says Sowore’s language is a deliberate attempt to “further an ideology capable of serious harm” and could inflame segments of the population, especially supporters of the President, into “unwholesome activities,” thereby threatening national security and tarnishing Nigeria’s international image. The letter explicitly asked X to remove the original tweet and attendant re-tweets “as a matter of your own policy.”
That framing, equating sharp political criticism with national-security risk, is the crux of the controversy. Critics point out that the state’s response collapses two separate things: ordinary political insult and actionable, violent incitement.
The DSS insists the distinction doesn’t apply when the target is the head of state and the rhetoric is “widespread” online.
Civil Society, Rights Groups And The International Angle
Human-rights groups have watched Sowore’s long legal history with alarm. Amnesty International and other advocacy organisations have in recent weeks accused Nigerian authorities of a pattern: repeated arrests, new charges, and now online suppression — a trend they link to a broader squeeze on civic space.
Amnesty has previously called for an end to what it calls the “relentless harassment” of Sowore. Many rights defenders say the DSS step is a dangerous escalation.
Internationally, the spectacle places X, a company that has traded global free-speech rhetoric for controversial moderation practices — under intense pressure.
Will X treat the DSS request as a local content-moderation demand and remove a single tweet, or will it resist a precedent that could hand authoritarian states another tool to silence critics? Either answer has geopolitical costs.
Why This Is About More Than One Tweet
Sowore is more than a loud voice; he is a long-standing symbol of dissent in Nigeria, a man who has repeatedly tested the limits of state tolerance.
That history gives the DSS letter a political character: it reads less like a one-off content complaint and more like a calculated message to activists, journalists, and opposition figures: You are being watched. Critically, the demand lands at a moment when civil-space groups say the state has intensified legal and administrative actions against opposition media and activists.
For the government, the calculus is straightforward: uncurbed abuse of the presidency’s image online, especially when framed in fighting-words, can stir unrest.
For some, the calculus is chilling: the security apparatus is policing criticism, not crime. The tension between those logics is playing out in public view — and on a deadline.
A Country’s Signal To The World
A single tweet has forced a collision between state power, individual dissent, and a global tech company. How Nigeria, through the DSS, through the courts, and through public debate, resolves this crisis will say as much about its commitment to democratic norms as any election result.
If national security can be used to erase political insult, what space is left for robust dissent in Nigeria? If platforms become censors for hire, where will Nigerians turn to hold power to account? The clock is now ticking, and 24 hours will tell a story about power, speech, and who controls both.
