 |
| Justice Azeez delivers ruling in defamation case |
A Lagos High Court in Ikeja has dismissed the preliminary objections filed by social media activist Martins Vincent Otse, known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), in a ₦1 billion defamation suit. The suit was filed by renowned human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) and his son, music artist Folarin Falana (Falz). Justice Fimisola Azeez ruled that VDM’s application lacked merit and ordered him to pay ₦200,000 in costs to the claimants. VDM must also file his defence immediately in the ongoing suits.
The Falanas claim that a video VDM posted on Instagram on September 24, 2024, carried false and damaging remarks against them. Each claimant seeks ₦500 million in damages, bringing the total to ₦1 billion. The court action aims to protect reputations and curb unverified online claims.
This ruling signals a firm stance by Nigerian courts on digital defamation and online accountability. It also sets the stage for deeper debate on free speech and responsible content sharing.
On May 20, 2025, Justice Azeez heard arguments on VDM’s bid to dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction. VDM argued that the alleged video was posted outside Lagos State, and thus the court could not hear the case. The Falanas’ team, led by lawyers Ernest Olawanle and Femi Akinyemi, countered that the content targeted them in Lagos, giving the court proper grounds to rule on it.
Justice Azeez found no merit in VDM’s jurisdictional argument. She noted that online publications can have impact where they are accessed, including Lagos. She dismissed the preliminary objections and imposed ₦100,000 in costs in favour of each claimant. VDM must pay ₦200,000 total and file his defence within 14 days. The substantive suit will continue on July 8, 2025.
The dispute arose from a 45‑second video VDM shared on his Instagram handle @verydarkblackman. The clip featured an audio recording attributed to controversial media personality Bobrisky. The voice clip claimed that Femi Falana and Falz used influence to shield themselves from legal scrutiny. The Falanas maintain that the claims had no basis and harmed their public standing.
VDM did not attend the hearing but was represented by counsel Marvin Omorogbe. Falz appeared in person, underscoring the suit’s personal stakes. Falana Sr. was present through his legal team.
Femi Falana (SAN) is a leading human rights lawyer in Nigeria. He has over four decades of litigation experience. He has argued landmark cases on civil rights, electoral law and freedom of speech. His son, Folarin Falana (Falz), is a celebrated musician and actor known for art that blends social commentary with rhythm. Both father and son hold strong public reputations in law and entertainment.
Martins Otse (VDM) is a social media activist with over 1 million Instagram followers. He posts on politics, culture and social justice. He commands wide reach but has sparked legal moves over his outspoken style.
Defamation in Nigeria covers civil wrongs that harm reputation. The law allows claimants to seek damages for libel (written) and slander (spoken). Online content falls under libel. Courts may grant injunctions to stop further circulation and order public apologies.
Experts note that digital defamation suits are on the rise. A 2024 public opinion survey found 70% of Nigerians mistrust unverified social media claims. Courts have begun applying traditional defamation rules to digital media. This case will test how strictly online influencers must verify claims.
Legal experts say the ruling aligns with global trends. Professor Aisha Bello of the University of Lagos Law Faculty says digital platforms do not shield users from liability. She notes: “Courts must protect reputations. Online publishers need due care.”
Media analyst Chike Obi warns against chill on free speech. He urges a balance: “Influencers need freedom but must verify facts. Dialogues should guide not punish speech.”
VDM’s suit highlights risks for digital activists. Nigeria’s online space saw a surge during election campaigns and protests. Many influencers thrive on bold claims. Legal moves like this may push for fact checks and better sourcing.
Activist groups worry about gagging honest expression. They call for safe harbour laws to protect platforms and fair procedures for removing content. Lawmakers are drafting an online safety bill that could reshape liability rules.
The ₦1 billion claim is large by Nigerian standards. Leading defamation cases often range from ₦10 million to ₦200 million. High amounts aim to deter reckless claims. Victims seek both compensation and deterrent effect.
If Falana and Falz win, VDM could face payouts and court orders. He may need to retract statements and publish apologies. His future content may be cautious to avoid liability.
Timeline of Proceedings
September 24, 2024: VDM posts contested video.
October 2024: Falanas file ₦1 billion suit in Ikeja High Court.
April 2025: Justice Dawodu strikes out a pre‑emptive suit by Falanas in another division, citing academic nature.
May 20, 2025: Justice Azeez dismisses VDM’s preliminary objections and fines him ₦200,000. Next mention on July 8, 2025.
On Twitter, many users praised Falanas for defending their names. Others fear the ruling may curb online debate. A hashtag #VerifyBeforeYouPost trended briefly.
Some activist have since added disclaimers to their posts. Media houses are calling for clearer guidelines on online defamation.