Justice J.O.E Adeyemi-Ajayi of the Federal Capital Territory High Court grants an interim injunction restraining activist Omoyele Sowore and Sahara Reporters from publishing further content concerning the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, his family, or his office pending the hearing of a defamation suit.
According to Mediaplusng.com, the court issues the order following an ex parte motion for interim injunction filed by the claimant through his counsel, Chief Ayotunde Ogunleye, SAN, dated February 10 and filed on February 11, 2026.
In the enrolled court order, the judge specifically restrains the defendants from making further publications alleged to be defamatory or derogatory, including claims concerning Victor Egbetokun, son of the Inspector-General of Police. The suit challenges certain allegations reportedly circulated online.
Mediaplusng.com reports that the application is brought pursuant to Section 6(6) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), Order 30 Rule 3 of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (Civil Procedure) Rules 2025, and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
After hearing the applicant’s counsel move the motion ex parte, the court grants the interim injunction pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice. The ruling restrains the defendants, their agents, servants, or any persons acting on their behalf from further publications relating to the subject matter of the suit.
According to Mediaplusng.com, the court adjourns the case to April 14, 2026, for further hearing, when parties are expected to present arguments on the substantive motion.
The order states that the interim relief is granted pending determination of the motion on notice, effectively placing temporary restrictions on additional publications connected to the allegations raised in the suit.
Legal analysts note that interim injunctions in defamation matters are precautionary measures intended to preserve the subject matter of litigation and prevent potential reputational harm before full judicial review.
The development underscores the intersection of media freedom, constitutional rights, and the protection of individual reputation under Nigerian law. Courts often weigh competing interests, including freedom of expression and the right to dignity, in determining such applications.
As proceedings continue, attention shifts to the upcoming hearing date, where the court will consider further submissions from both parties before deciding on the substantive issues raised in the defamation suit.
The case is expected to draw national attention, given the high-profile personalities involved and the broader implications for media practice, accountability, and judicial oversight in Nigeria.
