A social media storm erupted when the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) arrested popular activist Martins Otse, widely known as VeryDarkMan (VDM). Known for his fearless commentary and social justice campaigns, VDM has amassed over two million Instagram followers. His arrest outside a GTBank branch in Abuja triggered nationwide backlash, especially over the manner of his detention.
EFCC Accused of Silencing Critics with Cybercrime Charges
Top legal experts say the EFCC’s use of the Cybercrimes Act against VDM may violate constitutional rights.
Kunle Edun, SAN, condemned the growing trend of using cyberstalking charges to suppress dissent. He noted that Section 39(1) of the 1999 Constitution guarantees freedom of expression in any form, including social media.
Edun criticised the arrest-before-investigation approach of Nigerian security agencies. He argued that if EFCC obtained a remand order despite no evidence of a capital offence, it likely abused judicial power.
He stressed that dissent must be protected in a democracy and warned that these tactics damage Nigeria’s image globally.
Detention Without Trial Violates the Law, Says Adegboruwa, SAN
Human rights lawyer Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, said detaining VDM beyond 24 hours without charge breaches Section 35 of the Constitution.
He emphasised that arrest is legal only if authorities have reasonable suspicion and act within legal timeframes. EFCC’s prolonged custody of VDM, he said, amounts to evidence fishing and violates his rights.
He advised law enforcement to avoid criminalising speech. Anyone who feels offended by online statements should seek civil redress.
Arrest Without Investigation Undermines Justice
Anthony Aikhunegbe Malik, SAN, described EFCC’s actions as unconstitutional and authoritarian.
He explained that while cyberstalking is a crime under Section 24 of the Cybercrimes Act, the section has vague language that courts have questioned. Using it to stifle free speech contradicts legal precedents.
Malik said arresting a citizen before investigating or securing a charge is unjustifiable. He insisted that prolonged detention without court appearance or clear charges reflects badly on Nigeria’s justice system.
VDM’s Rights May Have Been Violated
Legal expert Mandy Demechi-Asagba identified multiple possible rights violations in VDM’s case.
She cited unlawful detention, breach of human dignity, and possible privacy breaches by GTBank. Section 34 and 35 of the Constitution, she said, guarantee VDM’s right to liberty and dignity.
She called for thorough investigations to determine GTBank’s role, if any, in the arrest. EFCC and GTBank could face calls for public apology, compensation, and institutional accountability.
What Does the Law Say About Cyberstalking?
Dr Tonye Clinton Jaja clarified that the Cybercrimes Act criminalises knowingly sending false or threatening messages online.
He added that holding VDM for over 48 hours without court approval violates both the Constitution and the Administration of Criminal Justice Act. Legal action could follow for violation of his fundamental rights.
Arrest Method Criticised as Gestapo-Style Intimidation
Jay Jones likened VDM’s arrest to a scene from a spy movie, describing it as humiliating and excessive.
He accused the current administration of using force and vague laws to silence critics. Jones warned that gagging activists like VDM undermines Nigeria’s democracy and dignity.
Uphold the Rule of Law
VDM’s case has exposed pressing issues in Nigeria’s justice system, from misuse of cybercrime laws to unconstitutional detentions.
Legal experts urge authorities to respect civil liberties and investigate both the arrest process and the EFCC’s actions. Citizens must demand accountability to preserve democratic freedoms.
