Shafi’u Tureta, a media aide to former Sokoto State Governor Aminu Tambuwal, was charged by the police on Monday for allegedly slandering Sokoto State Governor Ahmad Aliyu. Tureta was charged in front of a Sokoto State Chief Magistrate’s Court. However, it is purported that Chief Magistrate Fati Hassan gave the order prohibiting journalists from covering the proceedings. The defendant was apprehended by the authorities on August 25, 2024, and was charged with transmitting illegal media content. On Monday, he was first arraigned in court.
The accused was accused of violating penal code law by disseminating harmful falsehoods and engravings that were known to be defamatory, according to a First Information Report that prosecutor Abdurahman Mansur read. In spite of the starvation and suffering endured by the populace, the accused allegedly committed the charges on July 18, 2024, when he disseminated videos showing Hajia Fatima Aliyu, the wife of the governor, distributing cash on the ground during her birthday celebration.
Following the hearing, the accused submitted an oral request for release and rejected the charges, according to an interview with newsmen conducted by defence attorney Mr. Al’Mustafa Abubakar. According to Abubakar, the Chief Magistrate placed the accused individual in the custody of a correctional centre and postponed the decision on the bail application to September 6, 2024.
Tureta was also charged with disseminating a report that claimed the governor did not pass his Senior Secondary School Examination, receiving an F9 and lacking the ability to speak English proficiently.
In a signed statement provided to reporters on Sunday night, the party’s spokesman stated, “Our party understands that Tureta was arrested on the orders of Sokoto State Governor, Ahmed Aliyu, for sharing a viral video clip of the governor struggling to make a statement in English language and another equally well-circulated clip of cash spray at the governor’s wife’s birthday party…” Firstly, we would want to bring the governor’s attention to the fact that the images in question had to have been taken by cameramen who worked for his family or in his office and were originally leaked to the public by the same individuals.
