Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as Very Dark Man (VDM), has stirred considerable controversy in Nigeria, not just for his activism but for the defamation lawsuit he’s currently embroiled in. His legal battle stems from a post in which he accused Femi Falana, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), and his son, the musician Falz, of being complicit in a money-laundering cover-up for Nigerian social media personality Bobrisky. This came after Bobrisky allegedly released a voice note claiming that some EFCC officers collected ₦15 million to dismiss charges against him.
VDM’s subsequent social media post, which spread these allegations, triggered a defamation suit from the Falanas. Despite a court order on October 15, 2024, for VDM to retract his statements and delete the video, he has refused to comply, citing that he sees no wrong in what he did and is unwilling to apologize.
The Core Issues:
- Defamation: The Falanas argue that VDM’s accusations were baseless and harmful to their reputations. Defamation is the act of making false statements about someone that damage their reputation. By broadcasting these accusations publicly, VDM is legally liable for defamation, especially since the statements were false and negatively impacted the public perception of Falz and his father.
- Legal Responsibility: Kemi Afesojaye, a legal expert, clarified that publicizing false statements can be considered defamatory if it harms someone’s reputation in the eyes of the public. VDM’s social media followers (and the wider audience) were influenced by his unproven claims, thus damaging the Falana family’s reputation.
- Court’s Role and VDM’s Defiance: Despite being ordered by a Lagos State High Court to retract the statements, VDM has refused to comply. This puts him at risk of contempt of court, which could result in more severe legal consequences if the court chooses to enforce its order.
- Public Sentiment: VDM’s supporters argue that the real issue is Bobrisky’s alleged wrongdoing and that the Falanas should focus on him instead of suing VDM. They believe that VDM was merely exposing corruption, and the Falanas’ legal action is an attempt to suppress the truth. However, this perspective overlooks the fact that defamation is illegal, regardless of the motivations behind the statements.
- The Damage to Falz’s Reputation: Since the defamation case began, Falz has faced online backlash, with some commenters labeling him an “oppressor” or questioning his integrity. This damage to his reputation is a direct consequence of VDM’s public accusations, fulfilling one of the key elements of defamation.
The Bigger Picture:
This case highlights the tension between activism and legal boundaries. While VDM claims he was simply exposing corruption, the law places limits on how one can do so, particularly when the accusations are false and harm individuals’ reputations. In this instance, the legal consequences for his actions seem to be overshadowing his original intent, raising questions about how far one can go in the name of activism without violating others’ rights.
While VDM has gained a following for his boldness in challenging authority figures, this controversy serves as a reminder that even the most well-intentioned activism must navigate legal frameworks, especially when it comes to public figures and defamation. The case is far from over, and VDM’s refusal to abide by the court’s order may ultimately lead to further legal consequences, potentially setting a precedent for how such cases are handled in the future.
The Role of Social Media in Modern Activism
The case of VDM and the Falanas also brings into sharp focus the role of social media in contemporary activism and public discourse. Platforms like Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook have given individuals and groups unprecedented access to an audience, enabling them to voice their opinions and expose perceived wrongs. However, this democratization of speech comes with significant responsibilities.
In VDM’s case, his social media platforms became a megaphone for his allegations, but the public nature of his posts also made them susceptible to legal scrutiny. While he may have felt that his exposé against Bobrisky was in the public interest, he ignored the legal obligation to substantiate his claims—especially when it involves someone’s reputation, which is protected under defamation laws.
The rapid spread of information (or misinformation) on social media also means that reputations can be harmed almost instantly, and reputations are notoriously difficult to repair. Once the defamatory content is out there, even if it is later retracted, the damage can linger, as evidenced by the ongoing fallout on Falz’s Instagram comments section.
The Personal vs. Public Divide
A key aspect of this case is the blurring of personal and public lives, especially when it comes to public figures like Falz and his father, Femi Falana. The Falanas are well-known figures in Nigeria, not only because of their involvement in the entertainment industry (in Falz’s case) but also due to their significant political and legal influence (in Femi Falana’s case). As such, they are often under intense public scrutiny. However, their status doesn’t make them immune to defamation laws.
VDM’s supporters argue that the Falanas should be more focused on Bobrisky, who allegedly made the claims in the first place, but that argument doesn’t fully address the legal reality. Bobrisky’s voice note may have triggered the accusations, but it was VDM who chose to amplify those accusations publicly—without sufficient evidence, which is what makes his actions legally problematic. Public figures like Falz and Femi Falana are not immune from defamation, but they are entitled to protect their reputations when they are wrongfully attacked.
This creates a nuanced situation where VDM’s activism and his personal beliefs about who should be held accountable are at odds with the legal obligations he faces. Activism, in its purest form, may be about exposing corruption or social injustice, but that activism must be done in a way that does not violate other people’s rights or reputations.
The Legal Ramifications of Contempt
The fact that VDM has not complied with the court’s order could have serious legal consequences. Contempt of court—failure to adhere to a lawful court order—can result in sanctions such as fines, imprisonment, or both. If the court decides to take a tough stance, VDM could face even harsher penalties for not retracting the defamatory statements and removing the video.
This raises an important issue about accountability. VDM, despite his large following and his status as an activist, is not above the law. His refusal to comply with the court order undermines the authority of the legal system and sends a dangerous message that public figures or activists can act with impunity, especially when they believe they are on a “righteous” mission.
This case will likely set a precedent for how social media influencers and activists are held accountable for defamation in the future. If VDM is allowed to continue defying court orders without significant consequence, it could encourage others to follow his lead, emboldening people to make unfounded or malicious accusations online with little fear of legal repercussions. This could be particularly concerning in a society where social media has such a profound influence on public opinion.
Public Opinion: Divided but Impactful
As mentioned earlier, VDM’s supporters have been vocal in his defense, often accusing the Falanas of being “oppressors” or trying to silence him. This division is emblematic of the polarized nature of Nigerian social media, where issues quickly become ideological battlegrounds. Many of VDM’s fans view him as a whistleblower, someone who is not afraid to take on powerful figures in the country. To them, VDM’s actions are justified because he is speaking truth to power, regardless of the legal nuances.
On the other hand, critics argue that while VDM may have had good intentions, his approach was reckless and irresponsible. By making unverified claims and publicizing them, he has hurt people’s reputations and harmed their ability to work or maintain their public standing. This faction calls for greater responsibility among online influencers and public figures, emphasizing that just because a claim is public doesn’t make it true or justifiable.
This divide on social media is not just about VDM’s actions but also speaks to a larger issue in Nigerian society: the intersection of free speech, accountability, and the rule of law. In a nation where corruption, abuse of power, and social inequality are often in the spotlight, it’s easy for the public to become emotionally invested in activist causes. However, this emotional engagement can sometimes cloud people’s understanding of the legal process and the rights of individuals who are being accused.
What Happens Next?
As the case continues to unfold, there are several possible outcomes:
- Contempt of Court Charges: If VDM continues to ignore the court’s orders, he could face contempt charges. If the court decides to take a tough stance, he could face penalties such as a fine or imprisonment. This would significantly affect his public image and may diminish his influence as an activist.
- Appeals and Legal Loopholes: VDM may choose to appeal the decision, which could prolong the case and allow him to continue his campaign. However, this would not necessarily absolve him of legal responsibility. It might even make matters worse if the court finds him in further violation of the law.
- Public Backlash and Reputation Damage: VDM’s defiance of the court could also lead to a public backlash against him, especially if people begin to see him as a person who refuses to follow the law. While he enjoys support from his followers now, this could shift if more Nigerians come to view him as someone acting outside the bounds of the law.
- Setting a Precedent for Online Defamation: This case could become a landmark case in Nigerian law regarding the limits of free speech on social media. How the courts handle this situation could have a ripple effect on how future defamation cases involving public figures are treated in the digital age.
Courtesy: SYMFONI
Reference
- ^ “10 things to know about fast-rising online police VeryDarkMan”. 2 October 2023. Archived from the original on 12 October 2023. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ Kareem, Azeez (22 May 2024). “Social Media Critic Verydarkman Faces Cyberbullying Charges”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on 30 June 2024. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ Sahara (30 June 2024). “VeryDarkMan Arrested For Exposing Alleged Fraudster, Born in the Trap”. Sahara Reporters. Archived from the original on 30 June 2024. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ Ankrah, Shalom (2 October 2023). “VeryDarkMan: 6 Facts About him and Quick Rise to Fame”. Legit.ng. Archived from the original on 12 October 2023. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ Taiwo, Owolawi (22 October 2023). “VeryDarkBlackMan Who Went from Being Dragged to Becoming Celebrity”. Legit.ng. Archived from the original on 6 February 2024. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ Onu, Stephen (28 December 2023). “Hilda Baci, Ilebaye, Very Dark Black Man, other breakout celebrities of 2023”. Premium Times. Archived from the original on 6 February 2024. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ “Influencer of The Year – Silverbird Man of The Year”. Silverbird. 4 January 2024. Archived from the original on 17 April 2024. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ Ogugua, Ifezulike (12 January 2024). “Smoty: Tunde Ednut, Don Jazzy, Very Dark Black man, Others Nominated For Silverbird Most Influential Influencer”. Rhythm. Archived from the original on 26 February 2024. Retrieved 2 July 2024.
- ^ Sulaimon, Adekunle (22 May 2024). “Verydarkman remanded in police custody for cyberbullying”. Punch Newspapers. Archived from the original on 5 June 2024. Retrieved 30 June 2024.
- ^ Sulaimon, Adekunle (10 June 2024). “VeryDarkMan regains freedom after two weeks detention”. Punch Newspapers. Archived from the original on 30 June 2024. Retrieved 30 June 2024.
- ^ Johnson, Hannah (30 June 2024). “Police arrest VeryDarkMan over defamation allegations”. Punch Newspapers. Archived from the original on 1 July 2024. Retrieved 30 June 2024.
- ^ “BREAKING: Nigerian Blogger VeryDarkMan Released Hours After Police Arrest For Exposing Alleged Fraudster | Sahara Reporters”. Sahara Reporters. Archived from the original on 30 June 2024. Retrieved 30 June 2024.
- ^ “BREAKING: Femi Falana Gives VeryDarkMan 24 Hours To Issue Public Apology Over ‘Wicked, Offensive, Derogatory’ Bribery Allegations Involving Bobrisky | Sahara Reporters”. saharareporters.com. Retrieved 26 September 2024.