The Lagos State High Court has issued a significant ruling against the controversial social media critic Martin Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan. The court has mandated him to remove defamatory comments and videos concerning prominent lawyer and human rights activist Femi Falana (SAN) and his son, Folarin.
In addition to removing the defamatory content, the court has ordered VeryDarkMan to pay a substantial compensation of N500 million to Femi Falana and his son, Folarin, as outlined in the pre-action bundle associated with the judgment. This ruling emphasizes the seriousness with which the court views cases of libel and defamation, especially when they pertain to individuals of notable public standing.
This ruling stems from a legal response to allegations made by Otse that were considered harmful to the reputations of both Femi Falana and his son, Folarin. The judgment was delivered by Justice M. O. Idowu during proceedings in suit no: ID/8584/GCM/2024 on Tuesday, highlighting the court's commitment to upholding justice in cases of defamation.
According to the court’s findings, the publications made by VeryDarkMan on his social media accounts on September 24, 2024, which linked Bobrisky to Falz (a popular musician) and his father, were found to be defamatory and damaging to their public image. The judge underscored the importance of responsible speech and the potential consequences of unfounded allegations in the digital space.
Legal representative Dawodu stated, “According to the applicants (Falz and Falana), the defendant (VeryDarkMan) knew these statements (Bobrisky’s claims) were false and untrue but proceeded to publish them to injure their reputation.” This assertion highlights the malicious intent that the court perceived in VeryDarkMan’s actions, contributing to the weight of the judgment against him.
“Furthermore, the defamatory statements are still trending on the defendant (VeryDarkMan)’s several online platforms, and the injury to their reputation continues as long as the publication remains online,” Dawodu added, emphasizing the ongoing harm caused by the persistent presence of the defamatory content on social media. This aspect of the ruling serves as a cautionary note for social media users about the legal repercussions of spreading false information and the importance of maintaining integrity in public discourse.
