An Abuja based legal practitioner and human activist Marshal Abubakar has appealed to Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice to withdraw charge NO; FHC/ABJ/CR/253/2026 Between Federal Republic of Nigeria VS Chidiebere Justice Mark and to stop overzealous officials from criminalizing human rights .
Recall that the Department of State Services, DSS, had last week’s Monday arraigned Mark AKA “Justice Crack” a social crusader and media influencer on a three – Count charge bordering on cybercrime and incitement against military.
Trial court judge, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court Abuja where the defendant was arraigned ordered the remand of Mark at the DSS custody.
Pleading for the charge to be withdrawn, Abubakar stated: “We are counsel to the Defendant in the above referenced charge and at his behest and mandate, we write this letter.
“As a social crusader, human rights activist and media personality, our client has been vehement in critiquing the poor welfare, feeding and poor treatment of soldiers in the country including a recent expose on an incident in Dei-Dei, Abuja involving the brutal murder of a Youth Corps member; Abudulsamad Jamiu by military officers.
“Irked by the foregoing, Military intelligence officers on Tuesday April 28, 2026 at the NAOWA Shopping Complex, Asokoro, Abuja abducted our client after he honoured an invitation for a meeting.
“Following nationwide uproar and criticism over the state induced forced disappearance, the Military officers stealthily handed him over to the Department of State Security Services who subsequently filed a three-count charge on Monday 4th May, 2026 bothering on alleged violation of Section 24 of the Cybercrimes Act.
He further stated that, “in a bid to decriminalize the fundamental right of the Nigerian people to freedom of expression guaranteed by Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, the Federal Government amended the Cybercrimes Act 2015 in February 2024.
“More fundamentally, SSS is not established pursuant to any of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, nor by an Act of the National Assembly as one of the security agencies vested with the powers to undertake investigation, arrest and prosecute criminal offenders. The SSS was from inchoate the “E” Department (special Branch) office that was opened in 1948 and domiciled in the office of the Inspector General of the Nigeria Police Force.
He said that “on June 5, 1986 Decree no 19 dissolved the NSO and created the SSS as one of the three intelligence gathering agencies. In SARAKI V FRN (2018) NWLR S.C 405, the SSS had taken over the Investigation of the Appellant for offences purportedly violating the Code of Conduct Act, the Apex Court was not pleased with the development and had warned overzealous security agencies like the Department of State Security Service (SSS) in the following words;
“I need to emphasize that security agencies in this country must operate within the bounds of their calling. A situation where the EFCC and DSS took over the functions of the code of conduct Bureau leaves much to be desired. Although Security Agencies can collaborate in the performance of their functions, it makes nonsense of the law where the main agency entitled to act is sidelined only to be invited to testify.”
“Dear Honourable Minister, it is instructive to note that the Charge filed by the Department of State Security Services (SS) against a Nigerian citizen who simply exercised his right of exposing corruption, criticizing unfair treatment and labour practice is a gross violation of the 1999 Constitution, and Article 29 (2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights which has imposed a duty on every individual to serve their national community by placing their physical and intellectual abilities at its service.
“Indeed, Section 174 of the Constitution which vests in your good self the powers to institute and undertake any criminal proceedings personally or through officers in your department stipulates in Section 174 (3) that such prosecution shall be in regard to public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.
“In line with the letter and spirit of the said Cybercrimes Amendment Act, 2024, we hereby request you, Honourable Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation to use your good office to discontinue the charge pursuant to your powers under Section 174 (1) (b) (c) and (2) and Section 355 of the ACJA, 2015.
“Whilst anticipating your expeditious consideration of our letter, please accept, Honourable Minister as usual, our esteem professional regards, always.”