 |
| Social media activist VeryDarkMan in EFCC custody |
A well‑known critic, Martins Vincent Otse—aka VeryDarkMan—was detained by the EFCC after visiting a GTBank branch in Abuja. His lawyer, Deji Adeyanju, says officers used force and held him in a cramped exit door for over five minutes. The move has stirred debate on rights and due process.
VeryDarkMan rose to fame by calling out elites and banks on social media. He often tracks deductions taken without clear notice. His latest post warned GTBank of unauthorized debits on his mother’s salary account. He and his mother went to the bank to get answers.
On May 2, 2025, EFCC agents surrounded him inside the GTBank exit door. They kept the door shut for more than five minutes. That delay let them swoop in and arrest him and a friend. No formal charges were read at the scene.
His lawyer led a team, including Marvin Omorogbe, to the EFCC cell later that day. They found him refusing to leave until they assured him of his safety. Adeyanju calls this “inhumane treatment” and plans to sue GTBank for its role.
Neither GTBank nor EFCC has issued a public comment as of filing. Media outlets report no formal charges have been laid. This silence fuels public worry over unchecked power.
Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution guarantees personal liberty and clear arrest rules. Section 35(1) says no one can lose freedom except by law. Section 35(3) demands a detained person be told reasons in writing within 24 hours.
Experts note that failure to follow these steps can make an arrest unlawful. An unlawful detainment invites court-ordered release and mandatory compensation.
Isa Sanusi, director at Amnesty International Nigeria, says such detentions fit a wider pattern. In 2024, rights groups logged a rise in arbitrary arrests of critics and protesters.
A constitutional law scholar, Yinka Olomojobi, explains: “Arbitrary arrests breach both domestic and international safeguards. Detainees must know why they’re held and see a judge quickly.”
On social media, many decry the EFCC’s tactics. Some warn banks could become proxy arrest points for security agencies. Others back the EFCC’s mandate to probe suspected financial crimes—if done by the book.
Analysts say this arrest marks another case where anti‑corruption bodies target vocal critics. Last year, at least a dozen activists faced short‑term detentions after public calls for reform. Critics fear this trend chills free speech.
The EFCC’s core role is to curb fraud and corruption. It may argue that swift action at banks prevents evidence tampering. But legal experts insist due process can’t be skipped, even in urgent cases.
Many see this as a test for Nigeria’s democracy. If agencies can detain critics on shaky grounds, citizens may self‑censor. That outcome would clash with constitutional guarantees and hamper civic debate.
Adeyanju’s team will demand GTBank reveal surveillance and exit‑door logs. They will press for court orders to free VDM and sue for damages. Public interest lawyers await the EFCC’s charge sheet or statement of release.
VeryDarkMan’s case spotlights the thin line between crime fighting and rights abuse. Nigeria’s laws set clear limits on detention. The coming days will show whether institutions respect those rules or bend them when critics speak out.