In a scathing statement, activist and former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore has condemned Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu Liman over the recent seizure of his passport. Sowore, who is known for his relentless advocacy for democracy, human rights, and social justice, accused the judge of bias, ignorance of technology, and an attempt to undermine his right to travel freely.
The controversy erupted after Justice Liman ordered the seizure of Sowore's passport following a court case. Sowore, who was involved in various political protests and campaigns, alleges that the judge’s decision was politically motivated and showed a lack of understanding of the digital age and modern justice.
“I’m not after any judge, but I’m after justice,” Sowore stated in his press release. “Justice Liman’s actions are not only arbitrary but reflect an old-fashioned approach to justice that ignores the realities of technology and the pressing needs of our times. This decision is nothing short of a deliberate effort to prevent me from executing my rights as a Nigerian citizen.”
Sowore expressed concerns over the growing use of the judiciary for political control, asserting that the law should not be used to harass, intimidate, or stifle political opposition. He also pointed out that the seizure of his passport was an infringement on his constitutional rights, particularly his right to freedom of movement.
The activist further criticized Justice Liman for showing a lack of understanding of the contemporary role technology plays in today’s world. Sowore referred to recent cases where digital evidence, such as social media posts and online activities, have been central to legal battles, and accused the judiciary of lagging in adapting to technological advancements.
“I am a Nigerian citizen with the right to travel, and I will not allow a politically-motivated judicial system to take that away,” Sowore asserted. “This is not just about me, it’s about the integrity of our entire judicial system. I demand that Justice Liman recuse herself from this case and that a fair, impartial, and technologically literate court addresses these issues.”