Farotimi And The Strains Of Defamation By Ejiofor Alike

 

The recent abduction of a human rights lawyer, Mr. Dele Farotimi in Lagos by operatives of the Ekiti State Police Command over alleged defamation of a legal icon, Chief Afe Babalola was greeted with widespread outrage, with the human rights community and several individuals condemning the police’s actions. Given the seriousness of the allegations and the likelihood that his accusers may not bow to pressure, can Farotimi scale the legal hurdles? Ejiofor Alike asks…

Human rights lawyer Mr. Dele Farotimi had, last Tuesday, raised the alarm that powerful Nigerians and legal experts were allegedly colluding with security agencies to abduct him in a bid to silence him.

Farotimi narrated how he honoured an invitation letter from the Zone 2, Police Command on November 13 and was requested to return on November 21.

He stated that when he honoured the invitation, he was presented with a petition written by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Afe Babalola, accusing him of defamation in his book, ‘Nigeria and its Criminal Justice System.’

He alleged that a charge had been fraudulently preferred against him in Ekiti State at the instance of Babalola.

“This charge has been fraudulently preferred, hidden from view and the court had purportedly demanded my presence multiple times and I had failed to appear before this court. And this court had then proceeded to issue a bench warrant for my arrest,” he explained.

The human rights activist said Babalola’s plan was to have him picked up, and “taken before the Ekiti judge who would have been compromised or misled.”

“And I would have been remanded in prison custody for being somebody who was meant to face trial and who has refused to bring himself to court,” he added.

Farotimi’s fears were confirmed as armed policemen from the Ekiti State Police Command, later invaded his Lagos office on Tuesday, and allegedly made away with phones and other devices belonging to his members of staff, before the policemen abducted him. He was arraigned on Wednesday before the magistrate court in Ado-Ekiti on a 16-count charge of defamation of Babalola.

The prosecution, Samson Osubu, had asked the court to remand the activist in prison, while investigations continued. He said Farotimi’s co-conspirators were still at large and the published books were still in circulation.

“The Supreme Court judges mentioned in the book are yet to be investigated. To avoid threat to national security, we want to humbly say that the defendant be kept at Ado Ekiti Correctional Centre, pending the conclusion of the investigation,” the prosecutor said.

But the defense lawyer Peter Akeredolu, leading three others, made an oral application for the defendant’s bail. Akeredolu said the alleged offences in the case are bailable.

According to the charge sheet, Farotimi’s false allegation against Babalola and the Supreme Court justices is likely to cause fear or disturb the public peace and therefore punishable under Section 59(1) of the Criminal Code Act.

In a legal opinion, Babalola had previously argued that defamation becomes a criminal offence when it has a “tendency to arouse angry passion, provoke revenge, and set the society ablaze in a way that public peace is endangered.”

After listening to the counsel, the magistrate, Abayomi Adeosun, remanded Farotimi in prison custody and adjourned the case till Tuesday, December 10, for the court to hear the bail application.

However, widespread condemnations greeted the invasion of the law firm of the human rights lawyer and his abduction.

In its reaction, Amnesty International alleged that Farotimi was “punished for exercising freedom of expression.”

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar said the action of the police was a reminder of the dark days of military dictatorship in the country.

In his reaction, the presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the 2023 elections, Mr Peter Obi, described the arrest as a misuse of police powers and an assault on democratic liberties.

Also lending their voice were Obi’s supporters under the aegis of the Obidient Movement, led by its National Coordinator, Dr. Yunusa Tanko. They condemned Farotimi’s arrest and vowed to mobilise peaceful protests if the government continued its crackdown on voices critical of the government.

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) described the action of the police as a serious violation of the rule of law and an attack on the sanctity of the legal profession.

In a statement issued on Tuesday by its President, Mazi Afam Osigwe (SAN), the NBA cited the Criminal Law of Lagos State 2011, which repealed the criminalisation of defamation, aligning with global best practices that classify defamation as a civil matter rather than a criminal one.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in Aviomoh v. Commissioner of Police & Anor, Osigwe reiterated that Justice Helen Ogunwumiju (JSC), affirmed that defamation ceased to be a criminal offence in Lagos State following the enactment of the 2011 law.

Citing Sections 4 and 24 of the Police Act, 2020, which mandates the Nigerian Police Force to act only on criminal offences, NBA argued that arresting individuals for non-criminal matters is a blatant violation of the principles of legality and the rule of law.

In his reaction, a human rights lawyer, Mr Femi Falana (SAN), called for the unconditional release of the activist, recalling “that Lagos State is among the two states in Nigeria that have decriminalised defamation in its entirety.”

On its part, the apex Yoruba socio-cultural and political organisation, Afenifere, in a statement described the action of the police as “illegal, crude, uncivilised and most unacceptable in a country that lays claims to democratic practices.”

Other human rights lawyers, Inibehe Effiong and Deji Adeyanju have also condemned the arrest.

Despite the widespread condemnations, the Ekiti State Police Command on Wednesday justified its action, claiming that Farotimi refused to honour invitations from the command. The Police Public Relations Officer in the state, Sunday Abutu, was quoted in a media report as alleging that Farotimi failed to answer calls and letters requesting him to appear at the station which led the command to obtain a court order.

Abutu stated that Farotimi’s false publication was to cause fear and alarm in the public, insisting that it is punishable under Section 59 of the Criminal Code as well as Section 375 of the Criminal Code.

Despite the claims by his accusers and police that Farotimi’s defamatory publication is criminal in nature and likely to cause public unrest, rights groups and others insist it is a civil matter where the police have no role to play.

Given the gravity and sensitivity of the allegations, it is likely that his accusers will insist that the case runs its full course.

The question agitating the minds of many analysts is: Can Farotimi scale the legal hurdle given the fact that he will be tried by a system he accused of corruption?