Public interest and human rights lawyer Inibehe Effiong has weighed in on the ongoing defamation controversy involving renowned human rights lawyer Femi Falana and social media personality Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan.
Effiong, in a statement via X on Thursday, criticised VeryDarkMan’s handling of the issue and highlighted his lack of understanding of the law of libel.
“Saying that you expected Femi Falana to write to Bobrisky and not you, who actually published the defamatory matter, is just a demonstration of your acute lack of knowledge of the law of libel,” Effiong stated.
He emphasised that VeryDarkMan’s personal comments on the matter, combined with his publication of defamatory audio, made him legally liable.
He added, “Even if you want to plead the defence of fair comment in court, your personal and highly prejudicial comments make it improbable for you to prevail. Emotion is one thing; the law is another.”
Effiong further explained that in defamation cases, innuendos are actionable, even without a direct mention of names, if reasonable members of society can deduce who the defamatory remarks refer to.
“If reasonable and right-thinking members of society can deduce from your statement that you were referring to the claimant, and that the claimant’s estimation is lowered on account of your statement, you are liable,” Effiong said.
The case arose after VeryDarkMan posted an audio implicating Falana’s son, Folarin Falana, popularly known as Falz, in a conversation involving Nigerian crossdresser Idris Okuneye, also known as Bobrisky.
In the shared voice note, Bobrisky claimed that, following his conviction and sentencing for the abuse of naira notes in April, his godfather, in collaboration with the Controller-General of the Nigerian Correctional Service, arranged for him to serve his six-month sentence in a private apartment.
Bobrisky also allegedly claimed that he had been contacted by the rapper Falz and his father, Falana, who proposed to help him secure a Federal Government pardon for a fee of ₦10 million.
Reacting via a letter issued by Falana’s legal chambers, VeryDarkMan’s post was described as “vicious, wicked, and reckless,” and the law firm demanded a public apology and retraction of the defamatory statements within 24 hours.
“The law does not work that way,” Effiong warned, referring to VeryDarkMan’s suggestion that Falana should have addressed Bobrisky directly.
“Publication arises when what is said or written is brought to the notice of the whole world or third parties. That is what gives rise to a cause of action,” he added.
Effiong further cautioned that allegations of bribery and corruption against a lawyer must be backed by substantial evidence.
“If you’re going to accuse a lawyer, or anyone for that matter, of aiding a prisoner to avoid jail time or serve imprisonment outside the custodial centre, you should have solid facts to substantiate it,” he said.
Meanwhile, reacting to Falana’s letter on Thursday, VeryDarkMan clarified that he never defamed the human rights lawyer but merely expressed doubt about his alleged involvement.
He said, “First of all, I did not defame Uncle Falana, and I never will. Uncle Falana, SAN, is someone I respect 100%. I respect him not just because of his position as SAN, but because of what he has used that position to achieve—representing people like me. People like me speak out against societal ills, the abuse of power and influence, and the misdeeds of the government.
“How could I ever defame him? I only responded to Bobrisky’s claim that Falz connected Uncle Falana with a ₦10 million deal. What I said was that I chose not to believe Uncle Femi Falana would be associated with such a thing, and if he was, I would be disappointed because of his standing in society and what he represents.
Read the full article here
