Take It Back Movement Rejects Sowore’s Bail Conditions, Describes Them as Political Persecution

The Take It Back Movement has condemned the bail conditions imposed on its leader and African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, describing them as punitive, oppressive, and a continuation of what it called political persecution.

In a statement issued on Tuesday and signed by its National Coordinator, Comrade Juwon Sanyaolu, the movement argued that the conditions attached to Sowore’s release by the Federal High Court in Abuja were excessive and amounted to punishment before trial.

The group specifically faulted the court’s requirement that Sowore surrender his international passport and provide two sureties valued at ₦200 million each, with one being a traditional ruler and the other an owner of landed property in Abuja.

According to the movement, the conditions bear no reasonable relationship to ensuring Sowore’s appearance in court and instead reinforce concerns that the prosecution is aimed at intimidating and silencing one of the country’s most outspoken critics of corruption and abuse of power.

The Take It Back Movement maintained that Sowore had consistently appeared in court whenever required and questioned the justification for what it described as extraordinary bail conditions following the restoration of his bail.

The group further argued that bail is intended to secure a defendant’s attendance in court and should not be used as a tool to impose impossible hurdles or keep individuals in prolonged legal uncertainty.

It called for an immediate review of the bail conditions, urging the court to align them with the constitutional principles of fairness, reasonableness, and the presumption of innocence.

The movement also appealed to Nigerians and supporters of democracy to remain vigilant and continue speaking out against what it described as the shrinking democratic space in the country.

Reaffirming its support for Sowore, the Take It Back Movement said it would continue to mobilise and resist what it called attempts to criminalise dissent, insisting that the struggle for freedom, justice, accountability, and genuine democracy would continue despite the ongoing legal proceedings.