The Federal High Court sitting in Warri, Delta State, will on October 7, 2025, resume the trial of human rights activist Comrade Ighorhiohwunu Aghogho, in the controversial alleged cyberstalking case with the Nigerian Government, despite the Attorney-General of the Federation’s (AGF) denial of approval for the charges against Aghogho or his prosecution.
Aghogho, a human/child rights advocate and whistleblower, is standing trial in a suit filed against him under Section 24 of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015.
The activist is the defendant in Charge No. FHC/WR/92C/2022, Federal Republic of Nigeria versus Comrade Ighorhiohwunu Aghogho, which is currently pending before the Federal High Court in Warri.
Allegations and Early Detention
SaharaReporters had reported that a magistrate court in Delta State had, in June 2022, ordered the remand of Aghogho at the Ogwashuku Federal Prison over trumped-up allegations of “defamatory, cybercrime, false information.”
He is accused of publishing online reports alleging child trafficking and illegal adoption syndicates in Delta State.
The activist had been at loggerheads with the police in the state after he protested the lack of police vehicles for an investigation involving child trafficking.
He specifically accused the Assistant Inspector General, Zone 5 Benin, Lawan Tanko Jimeta, of compromising an ongoing child trafficking investigation involving Delta State Government officials, police officers, and a retired chief judge, among others.
Aghogho, whose case was later transferred to the Federal High Court in Delta State, had been granted bail by the Federal High Court Warri on March 21, 2024, after meeting all stipulated conditions.
However, on June 16, 2025, he was remanded in the Warri Custodial Centre under controversial circumstances, which now form the basis of his application.
He alleged that his re-detention was part of a coordinated retaliation after exposing deep-rooted irregularities in Delta State’s adoption system and implicating high-ranking state and judicial officials.
ECOWAS Human Rights Applications
In July 2025, SaharaReporters reported that the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), sitting in Abuja, was hearing an urgent human rights application filed by Aghogho against the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
The case, filed on June 19, 2025, and registered as Suit No: ECW/CCJ/APP/28/25, sought immediate intervention over alleged unlawful detention, judicial sabotage, and reprisals linked to the activist’s whistleblowing activities on systemic child trafficking in Delta State.
The application, brought through Aghogho’s legal counsel, Andrew N. Elekeokwuri of Andrew Ewoh & Co., invokes a range of legal instruments including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as well as provisions of the Supplementary Protocol on the ECOWAS Court and the Court’s Rules of Procedure.
On September 3, 2025, SaharaReporters reported that the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) officially registered a human rights case filed by Aghogho against the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
The suit, entered on September 2, 2025, and marked as Suit No. ECW/CCJ/APP/40/25, accused Nigerian authorities of multiple violations of Aghogho’s fundamental rights, including his right to property, liberty, fair hearing, and access to justice.
AGF Denies Consent for Prosecution
However, in the Certified True Copy (CTC) documents filed at the Community Court of Justice of ECOWAS, the AGF’s office denied authorising the filing of the charges against Aghogho, nor giving approval for his prosecution initiated by the Delta State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Ekemejero Ohwovoriole (SAN).
Part of the document obtained by SaharaReporters read, “The Defendant is not in position to know paragraph 1 of the Plaintiff’s narrations of fact and hereby put him to strictest proof thereof.
“The Defendant denies paragraph 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Plaintiff’s Narrations of fact and shall put the Plaintiff to the strictest proof thereof.
“In further response to above paragraphs, the Defendant avers that it was not aware of the suit in reference and the state attorney General has constitutional power to prosecute cases before the court.
“The Honourable Attorney General of the Federation renders legal advice whenever requested to do so.
“The state government through the House of Assembly has power to enact, amend and pass any law under the concurrent legislative list in so far as it’s not in conflict with the law made by the National Assembly;
“The law referred in paragraph 8-11 is not known to the Defendant.
“In further response to above paragraphs the Defendant state that the letter submitted to the National Assembly is for them to scrutinise and if there is any merit to act on it.
“The Federal Republic of Nigeria is strictly governed by the principle of democracy, social justice and as such each member has right to bring in a motion which must be debated by the house before any decision is taken.
“The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria provides the mode and how Nigerian will be governed and will not allow some few individual (sic) to disguise on the canopy of freedom of speech to incite violent in the country.”
Meanwhile, legal analysts point out that such consent is a statutory requirement under the Cybercrime Act whenever the Federal Government is listed as the complainant.
Whereas in its Statement of Defence before the ECOWAS Court in Suit No. ECW/CCJ/APP/28/25, the Nigerian Government, through the AGF office, claimed that it was unaware of Aghogho’s prosecution, and that the Delta State Attorney-General acted within his constitutional powers. Some legal experts disagree with the Nigerian government’s defence.
“Any criminal charge filed in the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria without the AGF’s consent is ultra vires and null and void,” a lawyer who spoke on condition of anonymity said in Warri.
According to legal experts, while Section 211 of the 1999 Constitution allows state Attorneys-General to prosecute offences under state laws, only the Attorney-General of the Federation, under Section 174, can initiate or discontinue prosecutions under federal statutes.
Meanwhile, the ECOWAS Court has been notified that Aghogho has formally requested the AGF to issue a Nolle Prosequi, seeking to discontinue the charges of cyberstalking.
In the letter dated September 24, 2025, Aghogho urged the AGF to halt what he described as an “unconstitutional and vindictive prosecution.”
His lawyer, Andrew N. Elekeokwuri, Esq., informed the regional court, via a notice filed under Article 21 of the ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol (A/SP.1/01/05), that the AGF’s office had already acknowledged procedural irregularities in an earlier legal advice (Annexure B2B), recommending that Aghogho seek dismissal of the charge as an abuse of court process.
The activist told the regional court that the continuation of the case, despite the Federal Government’s own admission of irregularity, “aggravates the violation” of his rights.
He urged the ECOWAS Court to take judicial notice of the new developments.
The case has gained public attention since Justice H. A. Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court revoked Aghogho’s bail on June 16, 2025, allegedly in response to a media report highlighting a contempt proceeding against the Delta State Attorney-General.
Aghogho, who spent over 600 days in detention before being granted bail in March 2024, denied involvement in the publication.
He said it was based on public court records under Section 102(a)(iii) of the Evidence Act and Section 260 of the ACJA 2015.
Following the bail revocation, Aghogho petitioned the National Judicial Council (NJC), accusing Justice Nganjiwa of bias and holding private meetings with a prosecution witness.
The NJC has acknowledged receipt of the complaint and advised him to pursue further legal redress.
Civil society organisations have condemned the prosecution, calling it “a test of judicial integrity and the rule of law.”
They have urged the Chief Justice of Nigeria and the Attorney General of the Federation to ensure compliance with constitutional procedures.
However, Aghogho has remained in custody at the Warri Custodial Centre, pending the outcome of his applications before both the Federal High Court and the ECOWAS Court of Justice, where he seeks declarations that his detention and trial violate his fundamental human rights.
Observers say the AGF’s denial of consent could become a turning point, possibly invalidating the trial and setting a constitutional precedent for how cybercrime laws are enforced against journalists and activists.
The matter will continue on Tuesday, October 7, 2025, when the court is expected to hear the applications for the Notice of Preliminary Objection and Witness Summons.
