Contrary to widespread media reports that he was remanded in the custody of the Department of State Services (DSS), embattled former Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Shendam Branch, Mr. Gabriel Nkup Tsenyen has told CITY LAWYER that he was granted bail by the Federal High Court.

Making reference to the reports, the Bar Leader who is facing fresh charges on cyberstalking following a petition by the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Bolna’an Dongban-Mensem, told CITY LAWYER that Justice Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court directed him to continue to enjoy the administrative bail earlier granted to him by the DSS.

His words: “The court did not order my remand with DSS. It said if I’m on administrative bail, I should continue; and I came back home from the court. I walked free from the court to my house yesterday (Friday). My Lead Counsel Emmanuel Esene SAN confirmed it.”

It was widely reported by major news outlets that Tsenyen was to remain in DSS custody till August 20 when the propriety or otherwise of his new trial on alleged cyberstalking and incitement of public disturbances would be decided.

Justice Abdulmalik reportedly issued the remand order last Friday when DSS applied for the arraignment of the lawyer on two-count charges of alleged cyberstalking and incitement.

Shortly after the lawyer was asked to enter the dock for his plea to be taken, Esene raised objections against the fresh arraignment.

He told Justice Abdulmalik that his client had already been arraigned at the same Federal High Court in Abuja on the same allegations and that his trial has been fixed for September 28.

He expressed shock at the new arraignment bid and pleaded with the judge not to allow it so as to avoid double jeopardy against the lawyer.

The prosecuting Muinat Oladunjoye, an Assistant Chief State Counsel in the Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP), office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, denied knowledge of any other similar charges against the lawyer.

The situation prompted Justice Abdulmalik to demand for a copy of the earlier charge which was promptly tendered by Esene.

Justice Abdulmalik also demanded for record of proceedings in respect of the earlier charge which could not be produced by the defence on the ground that the new charge was only served on the defendant on August 13, the eve of the aborted arraignment.

However, to fully ascertain the earlier arraignment on the same charge, Justice Abdulmalik ordered that the record of proceedings on the earlier charge should be produced before the court on August 20, 2026.

Pending the production of the record of proceedings, the Judge reportedly ordered that the Bar Leader should be remanded at the DSS detention facility. This has now been debunked by Tsenyen.

The fresh charge was filed by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Iseoluwa Oyedepo, SAN, on behalf of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice.

The two new count charges against the lawyer are:

COUNT ONE; “That you, Gabriel Nkup Tsenyen, adult, male, of Ngotuguut, Shendam, Plateau, sometime in May 2026, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did send a malicious publication via Ngootuguut local community whatsapp platform alleging that the entire Ngootuguut community was involved in a plot to eliminate you, which you know the content of the said publication to be false but send it out for the purpose of causing annoyance, insult, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will and needless anxiety in the Ngootuguut community and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 24(1) of Cybercrimes (Prevention, Prohibition, etc) Act, 2015, as amended.

COUNT TWO “That you, Gabriel Nkup Tsenyen, adult, male, of Ngotuguut, Shendam, Plateau, sometime in May 2026, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, did send a malicious publication via Ngootuguut local community whatsapp platform alleging that the entire Ngootuguut community was involved in a plot to eliminate you, which you know the content of the said publication to be false with intent to incite or cause breach to public peace and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 114 of the Penal Code Act, 2004.

A Case Summary seen by CITY LAWYER reads:

The Defendant is standing trial on Charges of offence likely to obstruct public peace and malicious publication with intent to causing annoyance. Director of State Service investigated the case and a prima fase case was established against the Defendant, hence the charge contrary to and punishable under Section 24 (1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Act, 2015, as amended is file before my Noble Lord.

(C) CITY LAWYER Magazine. All rights reserved. To join our Channel, click here. Click here to join our WhatsApp chatroom. Contact us at citylawyermag@gmail.com or 081-3838-0083.