A Sharia Court sitting in Kawo, Kaduna State, has set aside the conviction and four-year prison sentence imposed on a 23-year-old journalist, Farida Isiak, following her prosecution over a Facebook post criticising the police for detaining her parents in connection with a dispute involving ₦100 change from a charcoal sale.
The court reversed its earlier decision after the journalist’s lawyer, Mukhtar Abubakar, challenged the proceedings on the grounds that his client had pleaded guilty without legal representation and did not fully understand the consequences of her plea.
Following the intervention, the court allowed Isiak to enter a fresh plea, to which she pleaded not guilty, before granting her bail pending further proceedings.
The case has been adjourned until November 3, 2026, when the prosecution is expected to present its evidence.
The development followed public criticism of the journalist’s arrest, detention and initial conviction, with Amnesty International Nigeria describing the proceedings as a violation of her fundamental rights and calling for an independent investigation into the conduct of the police officers involved.
The controversy began after a disagreement between Isiak’s mother and a neighbour over ₦100 change arising from a charcoal transaction in Kaduna State.
According to accounts provided by the family, the disagreement resulted in the arrest and detention of the journalist’s parents by officers attached to the Mararaban Jos Police Division.
Isiak subsequently published a Facebook post criticising the police over their handling of the matter and the detention of her parents.
The Divisional Police Officer of Mararaban Jos, Usman Adamu, was accused of ordering the journalist’s arrest on October 20, 2026, following the publication.
Family sources alleged that Isiak was compelled to delete the Facebook post and apologise to the DPO after she was taken into custody.
The police subsequently accused her of defamation and brought her before a Sharia Court in Kawo on October 21.
During the proceedings, Isiak acknowledged that she authored the Facebook post, which had already been deleted.
The presiding judge, Aliyu Adamu, thereafter convicted her and imposed a sentence of four years’ imprisonment or an option of a ₦1.75 million fine.
The conviction immediately raised questions about the circumstances under which the journalist entered her guilty plea, particularly because she had no lawyer present when the proceedings took place.
Her counsel, Mukhtar Abubakar, said he arrived at the court while arrangements were being made to transfer the journalist to a correctional facility following the conviction.
According to him, the legal team immediately intervened to prevent her transfer and challenge the validity of the proceedings.
“We immediately intervened and halted the process because she had been arraigned, entered a guilty plea and was convicted without the presence of a lawyer,” Abubakar said.
The lawyer explained that Isiak had not fully understood the proceedings or the legal implications of admitting the allegation against her.
He said the legal team approached the prosecutor and raised concerns about the circumstances surrounding the guilty plea and the court’s decision to proceed without allowing the journalist access to counsel.
According to Abubakar, the court had been informed that legal representatives were on their way, but the proceedings continued before they arrived.
“We argued that this raised serious concerns about her right to a fair hearing,” he said.
He explained that the legal team subsequently engaged the prosecutor and presented arguments supporting the reconsideration of the conviction.
The prosecutor, according to the lawyer, eventually accepted that there were grounds for the court to revisit the proceedings.
The defence then formally applied for the earlier proceedings and conviction to be set aside and for the journalist to be permitted to enter a fresh plea.
The court granted the application, nullified the earlier conviction and sentence, and allowed Isiak to plead afresh.
She subsequently pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The court also granted her bail, with her father and other relatives required to stand as sureties to guarantee her attendance at subsequent hearings.
Abubakar described the bail conditions as reasonable and said the immediate objective of the defence had been to prevent the journalist’s incarceration before the legal concerns surrounding her conviction could be addressed.
“The bail conditions are not onerous. Her father and relatives are to stand as sureties to ensure that she attends subsequent court proceedings,” he said.
The lawyer maintained that the case would now proceed through the regular trial process, during which the prosecution would be required to present evidence in support of its allegations.
He also criticised the conduct of the police, accusing the officers involved of escalating a minor commercial disagreement instead of resolving it peacefully.
“The police acted unprofessionally and failed to discharge their primary responsibility of maintaining peace and order in the community,” Abubakar said.
“Rather than de-escalating a dispute over a mere N100, they exacerbated the situation, turning a minor disagreement into a more serious conflict.”
He argued that the actions of the officers transformed a minor neighbourhood disagreement into a criminal matter involving the detention of family members and the prosecution of a journalist over her public criticism of the police.
Amnesty International Nigeria also condemned the arrest, detention and initial conviction of Isiak, describing the actions against her as vindictive.
The human rights organisation alleged that the police used the detention of her parents to compel her to report to the station over the Facebook post.
Amnesty further described the initial proceedings as a “sham trial,” questioning the circumstances under which the journalist was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment or a ₦1.75 million fine without legal representation.
The organisation called for the charges against her to be dropped and demanded an independent investigation into the conduct of the officers allegedly responsible for the detention of Isiak and her parents.
The case has also brought renewed attention to constitutional protections concerning freedom of expression, personal liberty and the right to a fair hearing.
Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, guarantees freedom of expression, including the freedom to hold opinions and receive and impart information.
Section 36 provides for the right to a fair hearing and recognises the entitlement of persons facing criminal allegations to defend themselves in person or through legal practitioners of their choice.
The fact that a defendant has admitted making a statement does not, by itself, necessarily establish every legal element of a criminal offence arising from that statement.
The validity of a guilty plea and the fairness of the proceedings must also be considered in light of the applicable law and the circumstances in which the plea was entered.
Although the court has set aside Isiak’s earlier conviction and sentence, the criminal proceedings against her have not been terminated.
The prosecution is expected to present its case when the matter resumes on November 3, while the journalist will have the opportunity to challenge the allegations through her legal representatives.
Post Title: “Journalist’s Four-Year Jail Sentence Over Facebook Post Set Aside” — Sharia Court Grants Bail, Orders Fresh Plea In ₦100 Charcoal Dispute By Naijaonpoint.