The Department of State Services (DSS) has filed a six-count charge against a 27-year-old man, Innocent Chukwuemeka Onukwume, for allegedly using social media to advocate for a military coup against the democratically elected government of Nigeria.
The charges, filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja, mark a significant legal response to what authorities describe as seditious and incendiary online rhetoric.
The case, with the suit number FHC/ABJ/CR/610/2025, was formally filed on November 11 by DSS prosecutor A. M. Danalami. It alleges that Onukwume, a resident of Umusayo Layout in the Oyigbo Local Government Area of Rivers State, committed the offenses in October 2025.
According to court documents, the defendant is scheduled to be arraigned before the end of the week, where he will formally answer to the charges.
The specific counts detail a series of posts made from Onukwume’s verified X (formerly Twitter) account, @theagroman. One count alleges that he, “with the intent to cause fear and alarm to the public or to disturbing the public peace,” posted a message stating, “A coup in Nigeria is needed. Dispose of APC, suspend the Nigeria government and join the AES. That is all we need now.”
This charge is brought under Section 59(1) of the Criminal Code Act, which deals with actions likely to cause a breach of peace.
Further counts invoke the stringent Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, as amended in 2024. The DSS alleges that Onukwume’s posts were made with the intent to cause “insult, enmity, hatred, ill will, or needless anxiety” against the government. These charges cite posts where he allegedly wrote:
“It will happen eventually, Nigerian. The military needs your support now! Only them can save this country…”
He also referred to the occupant of Aso Rock as a “bastardd” who had “sold this country to the West.”
Another cited post contained a vitriolic attack on President Bola Tinubu and the ruling APC, stating, “Tinubu has to go and APC has to die for Nigeria to have any semblance of normal life.”
This legal action by the DSS sends a powerful message about the boundaries of political dissent in the digital age, clearly delineating the line between criticism and what the state considers to be seditious incitement.
