Imagine this: If Timi Akpor of Truth TV, known for his outspoken views, makes a bold statement criticising a politician’s handling of a public crisis, the statement ignites a national debate, with some supporting Akpor and others strongly disagreeing. This is a clear example of free speech, expressing personal opinions and challenging authority without fear of retribution. Now, consider a different scenario: A social media user spreads a baseless rumour that Rufai Oseni is involved in a financial scandal, tarnishing his reputation. The false information spreads widely, damaging his personal and professional life. This is defamation, spreading untrue statements with the intent to harm someone’s character.
Today, in a country like Nigeria, where free speech is a fundamental right, the line between what constitutes defamation and what is protected under freedom of expression has become increasingly blurred. Legal cases like that of legal giant Afe Babalola (SAN), who sued rights activist Dele Farotimi for allegations in Farotimi’s book, highlight the complexity of distinguishing between defamation and freedom of expression. Babalola felt that the claims made in Farotimi’s book unjustly tarnished his long-standing legal reputation.
In another case, social media influencer Martins Otse (VeryDarkMan) faced court restrictions after spreading accusations about rapper Falz and his father, Femi Falana. These instances demonstrate the tension between protecting a person’s reputation and the right to voice opinions, further illustrating the complexities of the law surrounding defamation and free speech.
Defamation laws, both civil and criminal under Nigerian law, (Criminal Code (Southern Nigeria), Section 373-375; Penal Code (Northern Nigeria), Sections 391-395) aim to prevent reputations from being damaged by false information. But the challenge lies in ensuring these laws are not misused to suppress legitimate criticism or stifle free speech. As digital platforms amplify both truth and misinformation, it is crucial to understand where the line between free speech and defamation should be drawn.
One example in Nigeria involves 95-year-old Afe Babalola (SAN), a legal luminary, and rights activist Dele Farotimi. Farotimi’s book, ‘Nigeria and its Criminal Justice System’, contained allegations that Babalola believed tarnished his decades-long legal reputation. In response, Babalola took legal action, seeking police intervention to address the harm such statements could cause to his integrity.
For Babalola, the key principle was clear: while free speech is protected, it should not come at the expense of truthfulness or reputation. His assertion that “the law allows free speech but not one calculated to injure the good reputation of another” reflects the delicate balance that must be struck in such cases.
The case of Martins Otse (VeryDarkMan) further illustrates this complex balance. After sharing accusations about rapper Falz and his father, Femi Falana, VeryDarkMan faced court-ordered restrictions. This highlights the dual-edged power of social media, amplifying free expression but also enabling the spread of harmful misinformation. Critics argue that while legal interventions curb defamatory content, they can also be weaponised to silence dissent, particularly when they infringe upon free speech.
The involvement of Nigerian police in defamation disputes has sparked significant debate. Regular critics argue that the police are sometimes used by powerful figures to intimidate or silence critics. This raises concerns about fairness and due process, especially when actions typically handled in civil courts are criminalised, leading to potential abuse of power.
Overreliance on police intervention risks creating a chilling effect on free speech, particularly in a country where law enforcement is often seen as vulnerable to influence. This could undermine the fairness of the legal process, turning what should be a civil matter into a criminal issue.
Hence, if an individual believes they have been defamed, it is important to remain calm and document the offending statements. Gather evidence, including screenshots, videos, and witness accounts. The individual should consider reaching out privately for a retraction or apology before escalating the issue. If necessary, consulting a lawyer to explore legal options, such as filing a civil lawsuit, is essential.
In another scenario, if an individual is accused of defamation, they should seek legal advice to understand the implications of the statements made. If the comments are untrue, a prompt apology and retraction may help mitigate further legal action. It is important to avoid making additional statements that could escalate the situation and to focus on resolving the matter amicably.
Now, the ongoing struggle to balance free speech and defamation underlines the complexities of modern discourse, particularly in a society where public opinion is shaped by rapid information flow and digital platforms. Cases like those of Afe Babalola and VeryDarkMan highlight the fine line between protecting one’s reputation and stifling dissent. Defamation laws are crucial in safeguarding individuals from false and damaging statements, but their application raises valid concerns about misuse, especially when powerful figures use them to suppress legitimate criticism.
Furthermore, the involvement of police in defamation cases exacerbates these concerns, as law enforcement can be used as a tool for intimidation rather than impartial adjudication.
This risks turning what should be a civil matter into a criminal issue, potentially chilling free speech and intimidating critics. In the end, it is up to the courts, lawmakers, and society to ensure a fair and just balance, where freedom of expression is respected while personal integrity is upheld.
Ogungbile Emmanuel Oludotun can be contacted via [email protected]
