Connect with us

Legal Affairs

Billionaire businessman, Ibeto, caught in petty dog-fight with Anambra lawmaker

Published

on

Billionaire businessman, Cletus Ibeto versus Anambra State lawmaker, Augustine Onyekachukwu Ike

UPDATE:

The Anambra State High Court sitting in Otuocha has allowed Nnewi-born billionaire businessman, Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto, to join the suit.

Chief Ibeto now needs to provw how he shares fundamental human rights with Hon. Augustine Onyekachukwu Ike.

Reacting to the development, the Special Assistant to Hon. Augustine Onyekachukwu Ike told newsman that constituents should go about their business and ignore the excesses of Ibeto.

According to the aide, his boss has more than enough capacity to manage the meddlesomeness of Ibeto effortlessly.

~~~

Nnewi-born billionaire businessman, Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto, has been engulfed in petty fight with Anambra State lawmaker, Hon. Augustine Onyekachukwu Ike.

The fight reached its crescendo when Chief Ibeto asked to be joined in a matter of an application by Hon. Ike, the Applicant, for the enforcement of his fundamental rights.

The matter was initiated in the High Court of Anambra State in the Otuocha Judicial Division holden at Otuocha suit no. OT/Misc.69A/2024, motion no: OT/946m/2024.

The suit has the following as Respondents:

  1. Inspector General of Police
  2. Habu San’ (Deputy Inspector-General of Police, Force Intelligence Department, Abuja.)
  3. Godwin Aghaulor ( Assistant Inspector General of Police, Zone 13, Ukpo)
  4. Nnaghe Obono Item (Commissioner of Police, Anambra State).
  5. Victor Ojong (Investigating Police Officer, Force Intelligence Department), and,
  6. Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto, Party seeking to be joined.

The Motion on Notice was brought pursuant to order xiii (1) of fundamental rights (enforcement procedure) rules 2009, sections 6 (6) and 36 (i) of 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and under the inherent jurisdiction of the Otuocha court.

In the affidavit in support of Motion on Notice, one Nneka Onuora, who identified herself as a staff of the Chambers representing Ibeto, had nothing tangible to tell the court why Ibeto wants to join another man’s enforcement of his fundamental rights matter.

She only stated that Ibeto “is a necessary party in this case because he is the nominal complainant to the Police in the case leading to this suit”, describing him as “not only a proper party but a necessary party in this case”.

She stated further:

  1. That the Applicant and supporters “vilified Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto and condemned his action without them giving him opportunity to be heard”.
  2. That the Applicant deliberately and Intentionally do not want to join Ibeto in this case so he can mislead the court, alleging that Hon. Ike secured the court order fraudulently and without proper notice.
  3. That Ike deliberately and intentionally refused to make Ibeto a party before the court to enable him to obtain court order fraudulently by suppressing the facts.
  4. That the Applicant had brought a similar application for Enforcement of his Fundamental Rights before Nnewi court in suit no. HN/Misc. 29/2023, Augustine Onyekachukwu Ike & Anor vs Inspector General of Police & 4 ors and judgment was delivered against him on June 11, 2024.
  5. That Ibeto will be highly prejudiced if the court determines the case in his absence.

She also claimed that Ibeto has direct knowledge of the fact and circumstances necessitating the Applicant’s Application and would be instrumental to a just conclusion of this given case.

Without prodding, Onuora defended that Ibeto is not a meddlesome interloper but the one the Applicant referred to as being invited to Abuja and that the outcome of the court proceedings will affect him.

READ ALSO:  BREAKING: Her Royal Highness Lolo Orizu of Nnewi is dead

Written address in support of Chief Ibeto’s Motion for Joinder

Below is the written address in support of the Motion for Joinder presented by Chief Ibeto:

Introduction

This application before this Court is for joinder of Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto as the 6th Respondent in this Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009 brought before this Honourable Court by Augustine Onyekachukwu Ike against the Inspector General of Police and five (5) others.

The Interested party has brought this application praying the Court for the following reliefs:

a) AN ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT joining Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto in this suit as the 6th Respondent.
b) AND FOR SUCH FURTHER OTHER ORDERS as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.

We rely on the supporting affidavit in adopting this written address as our oral argument in urging His Lordship to grant this innocuous application.

Issues for Determination

Whether this application is meritorious and ought to be granted?

Brief Facts Leading to This Application

On March 2023, the party seeking to be joined to this matter, who belongs to social media platform such as WhatsApp on a different group, watched with total disdain and disrespect wherein the Applicant before this Court was saying in the video record that Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto, the party seeking to be joined had secured arrest of warrant against him and that he has gone to Court and obtained a restraining order against him and the Respondents on record.

Sir, the interested party never secured any warrant and because the Applicant wants to be mischievous to shoot him off this fundamental proceedings. He schemed the party seeking to be joined out so that he will secure the judgment of this Honourable Court in a dishonest and fraudulent manner, hence this application because according to His Lordship Hon. Justice Niki Tobi in the celebrated case of Inakoju vs. Adeleke (2007) All FWLR pg. 33 R 40 “that litigation is not a game of cleverness, smartness or tricks. It is not a hide and seek game where one of the parties in all cleverness and smartness takes ambush and waits with all acrobatic dexterity for the opponent to fall into a trap and get him thoroughly harmed or destroyed. Litigation is not a game one of the where of chess parties attempted to trap the opponent’s king to obtain victory. On the contrary, litigation has an in-built dispute setting mechanism where the parties come out in the open to make their case frankly and not cunningly“.

LEGAL ARGUMENT

Whether this application is meritorious and ought to be granted?

We submit with every sense of responsibility that this application is not only meritorious but timeously and ought to be granted and we urge the Court to grant same for the greatest interest of justice.

We further submit that joining Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto in this case wherein he would be allowed to give an account of his own side of the story, the likes of Aguiyi Anaedo who said that after watching the Applicant’s interim order video will not continue to believe in his lies and blackmailing which is Applicant’s trade mark. The said Aguiyi had stated as follows:

“I condemn in its entirety, this obvious attempt(s) by Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto to scuttle the progressive future of Nnewi by scheming to hamstring the smooth election of Sir Augustine Ike-Aka Ikedoji, as the Nnewi North representative in the Anambra State House of Assembly from 2023 till 2027. Issuance of arrest documents against his person, is a direct attack on the much anticipated and highly progressive future of Nnewi and thus, must be frowned at by every Onye Nnewi. Ikedoji is one of the brightest young men in Nnewi, who enjoys the confidence of all and sundry thus, it is indeed distasteful that Ibeto seeks to rob Nnewi of quality representation in Awka and since nature abhors vacuum, all that will be left in the absence of Ikedoji would be mere stopgap at best. Nnewi is YPP and Ikedoji is the best brain to represent us, nothing should happen to Ikedoji”

The Applicant before this Honourable Court in this statement in support of his application and affidavit copiously stated that the 15 Respondent is currently handling criminal allegations brought before him but deliberately omitted to make Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto, who he has been castigating, insulting and maligning, so that he can be allowed to defend himself. It is indeed quite unfortunate that the Applicant was clever by half.

We submit further that it is a settled law that an interested party can intervene in a proceeding at any stage where he can show that he is a necessary party because it was in this instance of the interested party petition, that Applicant was invited to Abuja last year 2022 and he came sometime in early January, 2023 to write his statements and was allowed to go without even asked to get a surety. And the party seeking to be joined never applied for any warrant of arrest of the Applicant.

Therefore Sir, it is a settled law that all a party needs to show is that he is interested in the matter and ought to have been a party but was not joined and whether the decision or outcome of the suit will affect him. All these can be found in our Affidavit and we urge the Court to grant our application.

The Applicant before this Court knows that the party interested is a necessary party in this suit but he deliberately decided not to join him but will go on social media such as WhatsApp to castigate and defame Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto a quintessential gentleman of impeccable character in all ramifications without giving him opportunity to be heard.

Sir, it is the law that necessary party to a suit need to be made a party and in a suit for alleged breach of Fundamental Right, it is undoubtably that the person who complained to the Police is a necessary party. It is also our submission that a guilty person is always afraid and litigation is not a game of cheers or smartness in which parties lay ambush or hide and seek or short cuts. The Supreme Court in Larmie V.D.P.M Vs. Services Ltd (2006) ALL FWLR (pt. 296) 775 @803, paras E-D warned that:

“Litigation is not a game of trick and ambivalent short cuts covered with catching baits of the fisherman but one in which the parties came out openly to make their case for the decision of the Court. The principles of equity and fair play will not side a party who comes to Court with filthy and unclean hands”.

Finally, in Re. Magaji (1986) NWLR (pt.19) 759, it was held that joinder of a party is necessary to enable the Court effectively and completely adjudicate upon and settle the questions involved in the cause or matter and Court has an obligation to grant the application at any time.

Further to the above, the party sought to be joined is constitutionally empowered to do so and this is the intent and the spirit capsulated in Section 36 (1) of the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

It is Fundamental to note that the Rules for the Enforcement of Procedure of Applicant’s Rights by virtue of Order XIII allows Chief Dr. Cletus Ibeto Omekannaya “OON” to come in suo muto, but for avoidance of doubt let us reproduce the said Order XIII (1) of Fundamental Rights:

“Any person or body who desires to be heard in respect of any human rights Application and who appears to the Court to be a proper party to be heard may be heard whether or not the party has been served with any of the relevant processes and whether or not the party has any interest in the matter”.

Conclusion

We urge the Court to grant this application for the greatest interest of justice, bearing in mind that the Supreme Court celebrated the case of FBN Vs. Ndoma-Egba (2006) ALL FWLR (pt. 307) lO12© 1045, Paras D-E where the Court clearly held thus;

‘Courts do not administer justice in the abstract and the justice administer by the Courts is justice in accordance xxwith the law. It is only by orderly administration of law and obedience to the Rules that legal justice can be attained”. 5.02 We urge the Court to look at order XIII (1) of Fundamental Right Enforcement Procedure 2009 and grant our application without much ado.”

The application dated 31st July, 2024, and signed by Sir Marcel C. Dim-Udebuani Esq. and seven others, was due for service on the Applicant through Kaine Ananwune Esq. and Chimdi M. Amankwe Esq, Counsel Fides Attorneys, as well as other five respondents, mostly police authorities.

READ ALSO:  Nnewi Professionals, Stakeholders Write Soludo, List Strategic Actions For Nnewi Holistic Development

However, after reading the application filed by Chief Ibeto through his Counsel, Hon. Ike, citing the presiding judge, wondered what the interest of Ibeto is in chasing shadows in a case that has all the marks of a citizen’s fundamental rights issues clearly written on it and not a matter of litigation.

The judge is yet to decide if he will grant the request for a joinder by Chief Ibeto or not.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Legal Affairs

Outrage as Court Grants Bail to Suspects in Wedding Guest Killings in Plateau

Published

on

Relatives of the 13 wedding guests killed in Plateau State have condemned the State High Court’s decision to release 20 suspects on bail.

The victims were brutally murdered on June 12, 2025, when a mob attacked their bus in Mangun district, Mangu Local Government Area.

They were traveling from Kaduna State to attend a wedding in Qua’an Pan LGA before tragedy struck.

According to reports, the group lost their way and entered a volatile community already shaken by recent terrorist activity.

Local youths allegedly mistook them for bandits and launched a deadly assault, leaving 13 people dead on the spot.

Following the killings, security operatives arrested 21 suspects.

In an earlier court sitting, 20 of them were remanded at the Jos Correctional Center while investigations continued.

However, on Wednesday, August 20, Justice Nafisa Lawal Musa granted bail after a motion filed by defence counsel, Garba Pwul (SAN).

This ruling has triggered outrage among the families of the victims, who insist the development is a slap in the face of justice.

Mallam Abdullahi Tahir Balami, a relative of one of the deceased, condemned the court’s action.

Speaking to reporters, he described the ruling as suspicious and raised concerns about possible foul play.

“With this development, we are now questioning the commitment of the Plateau State government to justice,” Balami said.

“It is saddening that suspects in a multiple homicide case can be released on bail.”

Another relative, Mallam Ubale Anguwar Dantsoho, who lost several family members, also expressed anger.

He described the decision as shocking and warned that justice may never be served.

READ ALSO:  US closes door on Nigeria as gas export drops to zero

“How can suspects in a murder case be granted bail?” he asked. “It shows that our system is failing us.”

Maryam Usman, widow of the driver killed in the massacre, expressed her heartbreak.

She said she struggled to understand why suspects linked to such a crime would be freed.

“What kind of court is this?” she asked in despair. “Instead of justice, the court dashed our hopes. We no longer believe justice will come.”

Her words echoed the feelings of many families now convinced that the judiciary has abandoned them.

Human rights activists are also calling for urgent intervention from both the state and federal governments to ensure accountability.

The Plateau killings have become one of the most disturbing tragedies in recent months.

The case now highlights the growing tension between grieving families and a judicial system accused of ignoring victims.

Continue Reading

Legal Affairs

JUST IN: Irish rapper Mo Chara faces terror charge as free speech debate intensifies

DDM News

Published

on

(DDM) – Hundreds of protesters filled the streets outside Westminster Magistrates Court in London on Wednesday, rallying behind Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, widely known as Mo Chara, a member of the politically charged Irish rap group Kneecap.

Diaspora Digital Media (DDM) gathered that Mo Chara has been charged with allegedly displaying a Hezbollah flag during a performance in London in 2024. The Lebanese organization is classified as a terrorist group under UK law.

The case has sparked global conversations about free speech, artistic expression, and the extent of counterterrorism measures in democratic societies.

Mo Chara has firmly denied the allegations, calling the case a “carnival of distraction” designed to divert attention from the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

Court Drama and Public Outcry

Supporters waved Palestinian flags and held banners as the 27-year-old rapper arrived at the courthouse, escorted by fellow bandmates Naoise O Caireallain and JJ O Dochartaigh.

Chants of “Free Mo Chara” filled the air as photographers struggled to capture the dramatic scene amid a chaotic press scrum.

Inside the courtroom, legal arguments centered on whether the case had been brought within the six-month statutory limit required for such charges.

Judge Paul Goldspring adjourned the matter until September 26, 2025, when he will issue a decision on whether the trial will proceed.

Mo Chara spoke briefly, confirming his name, date of birth, and address, but refrained from entering a plea.

As he exited, protesters renewed their chants, calling on the authorities to “drop the charges now” and vowing to return in even larger numbers at the next hearing.

READ ALSO:  Sexual allegations: Suspended Unical lecturer drags VC, others to court

Background on Kneecap and UK Terror Laws

Formed in Belfast in 2017, Kneecap is known for its unapologetically political lyrics, often performed in the Irish language, and for addressing themes such as nationalism, resistance, and social inequality.

The band rose to international prominence following performances across Europe and the United States, including a high-profile appearance at the Coachella music festival in California in early 2024.

During the Coachella performance, the group displayed messages condemning Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, further fueling debate about their political stance.

Under the UK’s Terrorism Act, displaying or wearing symbols associated with a proscribed organization can be considered an offense, even when done in the context of political protest or artistic performance.

Free Speech or National Security?

Critics argue that the charge against Mo Chara reflects an overly broad interpretation of counterterrorism laws, one that risks stifling legitimate political expression.

Supporters contend that the rapper’s actions fall squarely within the realm of artistic commentary and should not be criminalized.

Civil rights groups have described the prosecution as part of a growing trend in which political symbols are policed with increasing rigidity, particularly in cases relating to Middle Eastern conflicts.

Observers warn that the outcome of the September hearing could set a major precedent, either reinforcing or relaxing how far artists can go in expressing controversial views through their work.

 

Continue Reading

Analysis

Former Delta governor’s fraud case sparks political controversy

DDM News

Published

on

Alleged ₦1.3 Trillion Fraud: I No Dey Fear EFCC Investigation – Okowa 

(DDM) – Allegations of selective justice have resurfaced following claims that former Delta State Governor, Dr. Ifeanyi Okowa, has been cleared of corruption charges after reportedly aligning with the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

Diaspora Digital Media (DDM) gathered that the issue began after reports in late 2024 suggested that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had arrested and detained Okowa over alleged involvement in a N1.3 trillion fraud case.

The Nation newspaper had, at the time, reported the arrest and confirmed EFCC’s detention of the ex-governor, sparking intense public debate.

Okowa, who governed Delta State between 2015 and 2023 under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), was accused of massive financial mismanagement during his tenure.

Critics alleged that funds meant for infrastructural development and social services in the oil-rich state were misappropriated, with some linking the alleged diversion to inflated contracts and questionable project executions.

The EFCC, according to earlier statements, had maintained that investigations were ongoing and that no stone would be left unturned in prosecuting those found culpable.

However, recent developments have triggered outrage among opposition voices, activists, and sections of the public.

Political commentators now claim that since Okowa’s alleged defection to the APC, his “sins” have been “forgiven” and the case quietly shelved.

They argue that this move reinforces fears that Nigeria’s anti-corruption fight is selective, shielding political allies while targeting opponents.

Some opposition figures described the situation as “a mockery of the justice system” and “proof that political loyalty, not integrity, determines who gets prosecuted.”

READ ALSO:  The concept of recall in Nigeria’s democracy

The APC leadership, on the other hand, has neither officially confirmed nor denied Okowa’s membership, leaving room for speculation and heated political commentary.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration has often insisted that it remains committed to fighting corruption, regardless of political affiliation.

However, the growing perception that joining the ruling party can offer immunity from prosecution threatens to undermine public trust in government institutions.

Okowa’s political journey has been closely watched, especially after serving as Vice Presidential candidate to Atiku Abubakar in the 2023 general elections.

Following the PDP’s defeat, his political relevance appeared to wane, but recent alignments have reignited interest in his career.

Human rights groups are now demanding transparency from both the EFCC and the APC on the status of the N1.3 trillion fraud allegations.

They insist that only a clear, public update on the case will restore confidence in the fight against corruption.

Meanwhile, EFCC’s official spokesperson has declined to comment on whether the investigation is ongoing or concluded.

For many Nigerians, the Okowa saga is another test of the country’s ability to hold leaders accountable without political bias.

Until clarity emerges, the debate over selective justice and political immunity is likely to dominate Nigeria’s political discourse.

 

🚨 Follow DDM WhatsApp channel Now!

Get breaking news, hot gist, and updates FIRST!

*📲 Click to join 👇* https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vajkwdc4dTnFHl19vW3g

*Apply at the link below and Start Your Tech Journey:*

👇🏽

https://www.ddm.media/cohort-6

Continue Reading

Legal Affairs

Tinubu’s APC launches early 2027 campaigns despite INEC ban

DDM News

Published

on

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu

(DDM) – The All Progressives Congress (APC), led by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, has begun subtle but visible campaign activities across Nigeria, despite the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) yet to release the official timetable for the 2027 general elections.

Billboards, posters, and indirect endorsements have started appearing in various parts of the country, signaling a premature political push by the ruling party.

The development was brought to public attention on social media by Hon. Comrade Gbagba Abdulrasheed Ibraheemalfa, who condemned the move as a flagrant violation of Nigeria’s electoral laws.

According to INEC’s electoral guidelines, such activities are unlawful at this stage and punishable under the law.

Section 94(1) of the Electoral Act 2022 clearly states that campaigns in public by political parties can only commence 150 days before the scheduled election date and must end 24 hours before election day.

This means that any political campaign, whether direct or indirect, carried out more than two years ahead of the polls violates the electoral law.

Critics have described the APC’s move as a blatant show of desperation and a dangerous disregard for the law, especially since the actions are reportedly being driven from the highest level of government.

Political observers note that it is unprecedented for a ruling party to openly flout electoral regulations in such a manner without fear of repercussions.

Some opposition figures have questioned whether INEC has the political will to sanction the APC, given its current position as the ruling party with presidential backing.

Analysts say early campaigns can give an unfair advantage to the incumbent government, allowing it to leverage state resources for political purposes long before the official campaign period begins.

READ ALSO:  The concept of recall in Nigeria’s democracy

They also warn that such actions could further erode public trust in Nigeria’s democratic process, where the rule of law is often undermined by political interests.

With the APC’s early campaign machinery already visible on streets, highways, and social media, concerns are growing over the silence of electoral authorities and civil society groups.

DDM gathered that in previous election cycles, INEC had issued warnings to political parties for early campaigning, but enforcement has historically been weak.

For now, the APC appears unbothered by potential legal consequences, continuing its publicity blitz as if in full campaign mode.

The development raises a critical question, if the presidency itself is associated with this premature political activity, who will have the authority and courage to call the party to order?

Many Nigerians are now watching to see whether INEC will take action or allow this as yet another example of selective enforcement of the law in the country’s political space.

Written by Hon. Comrade Gbagba Abdulrasheed Ibraheemalfa

 

🚨 Follow DDM WhatsApp channel Now!

Get breaking news, hot gist, and updates FIRST!

*📲 Click to join 👇* https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vajkwdc4dTnFHl19vW3g

*Apply at the link below and Start Your Tech Journey:*

👇🏽

https://www.ddm.media/cohort-6

Continue Reading

Featured

Reno Omokri Finally Lands In Trouble As Nnamdi Kanu Slams N60bn Libel Suit On Him

Published

on

Nnamdi Kanu versus Reno Omokri

The leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, has slammed a sixty billion Naira defamation suit against locaqious Reno Omokri, who he claimed, damaged his reputation.

The suit was instituted in the High Court of Enugu State, holden at Enugu, filed by Aloy Ejimakor, Esq., on behalf of Mazi Kanu.

Diaspora Digital Media (DDM) is in possession of the Form 2 issued by the court and served on Mr. Omokri.

In Nigerian law, Form 2 refers to a General Form of Writ of Summons, which is a legal document used to initiate civil proceedings in court.

This form is used when a claimant (plaintiff) wants to sue a defendant in a civil matter.

It’s essentially the formal notice that a legal action has been filed and that the defendant is required to respond.

How it all started

Nnamdi Kanu, the Plaintiff, had approached the court in the suit, with case no: E/1034/2025, instituted for himself and on behalf of IPOB, with Reno Omokri as the Defendant.

The Writ of Summons Order 3, Rule 3, dated July 31, 2025, and signed by the Registrar of the court, reads follows:

“Reno Omokri, you are hereby commanded within forty-two (42) days after the service of this writ on you, inclusive of the day of such services, you do cause an appearance to be entered for you in an action at the suit of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

“And take notice that in default of your so doing the plaintiff may proceed in your absence, and judgment may be given.”

Kanu made claim for general damages in the sum of N50,000,000,000.00 (fifty billion Naira) for defamation, including injury to reputation, emotional distress, and prejudice to ongoing judicial proceedings.

He also made claim for aggravated damages in the sum of N10,000,000,000.00 (ten billion Naira) for the malicious and reckless publication of false statements by Omokri.

The Plaintiff further prayed the court for:

  1. An order directing the Defendant to publish a full retraction of the defamatory statements in two national newspapers and on the Defendant’s Twitter/X account within 7 days of the court’s judgment.
  2. An order directing the Defendant to publish a public apology to the Plaintiff in two national newspapers and on the Defendant’s Twitter/X account, admitting to the misrepresentation of facts.
  3. A perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant his agents, privies, or assigns from further publishing or disseminating such defamatory or prejudicial statements about the Plaintiff without lawful justification.
  4. Costs of this action, including legal fees and expenses incurred by the Plaintiff.
  5. Interest on all monetary awards at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of judgment until full payment.
READ ALSO:  Musk’s Starlink to launch in India through Airtel

“Facts of the claim” against Omokri

In the Statement of Claim against Omokri, Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer stated as follows:

“The Plaintiff is a Nigerian citizen, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), and a person of high public standing, currently facing trial in Nigeria.

“Facts of the claim: The Plaintiff is a well-known public figure and the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), an organization advocating for the self-determination of its people within the contraption, Nigeria.

“On or about 6/7/2025, the Defendant published or caused to be published, in his verified Twitter (X) account… certain statements concerning the Plaintiff, falsely alleging that the Plaintiff and IPOB were responsible for the killing of soldiers, police officers, and other security personnel, as well as acts of violence attributed to so-called “Unknown Gunmen.”

“The said publication is reproduced below in its original nature-

“Do you know how many Nigerian soldiers, police officers, customs, immigration, and prison officers, as well as NSCDC servicemen and women, have been killed by IPOB, ESN, and Unknown Gunmen in the Southeast, of which the majority have been from Northern Nigeria?”

“The said publication further described the Plaintiff and IPOB as engaging in terrorist activities, including the operations of the Eastern Security Network (ESN), without lawful justification or evidence.

“The said statements are false, baseless, prejudicial, and defamatory, as they portray the Plaintiff as a criminal and a terrorist, thereby injuring his reputation, character, exposing him to public hatred, contempt, ridicule, and prejudicing his ongoing judicial proceedings in Charge No: FHC/ABJ/CR/383/15 pending at the Federal High Court Abuja.

“Plaintiff contends that as of the date of the malicious statements (6/7/2025), no court of competent jurisdiction in Nigeria has convicted the Plaintiff of any offense involving the killing of security personnel or acts of terrorism, rendering the Defendant’s assertions factually incorrect and malicious.

“The Defendant’s publication constitutes prejudicial commentary on the Plaintiff’s pending judicial proceedings, amounting to contempt of court and a violation of the Plaintiff’s right to a fair hearing and presumption of innocence under Section 36(5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”

Pre-Action Notice against Omokri

The Plaintiff, through his counsel, P.N Agazie Esq of P. N. Agazie & Co., issued a Pre-Action Notice dated 10/7/2025 against Omokri.

READ ALSO:  US closes door on Nigeria as gas export drops to zero

He demanded the following:

a. A retraction of the defamatory statements in two national newspapers and on the Defendant’s Twitter/X account.

b. A public apology admitting to the misrepresentation of facts concerning the Plaintiff

c. A written undertaking to refrain from further defamatory or prejudicial publications.

However, “the Defendant failed, refused, or neglected to comply with the demands in the Pre-Action Notice”, which necessitated the suit.

Kanu fired on: “The statements published by the Defendant are defamatory in that they:

a. Were false and malicious, asserting criminal conduct without evidence.

b. Lowered the Plaintiff’s reputation in the estimation of right-thinking members of the society.

c. Exposed the Plaintiff to hatred, contempt, and ridicule.

d. Caused significant injury to the Plaintiff’s personal and overall reputation.

“The defamatory statements were published to a wide audience… thereby amplifying the damage to the Plaintiff’s reputation both within Nigeria and internationally.

“The malicious and false publication was read at Enugu by numerous persons including the younger brother of the plaintiff – Prince Emmanuel Kanu.”

Defamation meets prejudice

Kani insisted that the publication by Omokri constitutes prejudicial commentary on his ongoing judicial proceedings.

He also opined that it undermined the integrity of the judicial process and violating the principles of fair hearing and presumption of innocence.

Those principles are guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

According to him, the said publication amounts to contempt of court, interfering with the administration of justice and prejudices the Plaintiff’s right to a fair trial.

Consequent upon the “defamatory publication”, Kanu said he suffered significant reputational harm, damages, emotional distress, and prejudice to his ongoing legal proceedings.

“The Plaintiff’s standing as a public figure and leader of IPOB has been severely damaged smeared and tainted, leading to loss of goodwill, public trust, and support.

“The Plaintiff has also suffered financial loss, including costs incurred in addressing the defamatory publication and mitigating its effects,” he cried.

Find attached a copy of the suit:

Kanu’s junior brother joins the scramble for Omokri’s head

Kanu’s claim was supported with a written statement on oath of his witness and junior brother, Prince Emmanuel Kanu.

Prince Kanu swore on oath and stated in part as follows:

“I am related by full blood to the Plaintiff and have known him all my life, spanning from when I was born to the present…

“I know that Plaintiff has been married for several years to Lolo, Mrs Uchechi Kanu and they have several children, and he maintains a residence at Enugu.

READ ALSO:  Adamawa targets 1.4M Children for Polio Immunization

“I know that Plaintiff is the Crown Prince of Afaraukwu Ibeku, being the first son of our late father, Eze I. O. Kanu…

“I know that Plaintiff is the Director of Radio Biafra and Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) which is registered as a non-violent self-determination movement in the United Kingdom and has tens of millions of nonviolent members and followers worldwide… who altogether hold the Plaintiff in high esteem.

“I know that Plaintiff has been a mentor to many across Nigeria and beyond, including particularly my humble self and the thousands of people he has positively impacted their lives.”

He continued: “The Defendant’s publication constitutes prejudicial commentary on the Plaintiff’s ongoing judicial proceedings, undermining the integrity of the judicial process and violating the principles of fair hearing and presumption of innocence guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

“The said publication amounts to contempt of court, as it interferes with the administration of justice and prejudices the Plaintiff’s right to a fair trial.

“As a direct result of the Defendant’s defamatory publication, the Plaintiff has suffered significant reputational harm, damages, emotional distress, and prejudice to his ongoing legal proceedings.

“The Plaintiff’s standing as a public figure and leader of IPOB has been severely damaged smeared and tainted, leading to loss of goodwill, public trust, and support.

“The Plaintiff has also suffered financial loss, including costs incurred in addressing the defamatory publication and mitigating its effects.”

Kanu reiterated his brother’s earlier claims against Omokri, including general damages in the sum of fifty billion Naira for defamation, and aggravated damages in the sum of ten billion Naira, “for the malicious and reckless publication of false statements by the Defendant”.

About Omokri

Reno Omokri has been nominated for an ambassadorial position by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

His appointment, however, has not yet been officially confirmed.

According to multiple reports, Omokri is among several prominent figures, such as Shehu Sani and Femi Fani-Kayode, for appointments.

Presently, they are undergoing security clearance checks by the Department of State Services (DSS) before the appointments are finalized.

There has also been some public opposition to his nomination, though.

The Ohanaeze Youth Council (OYC), for instance, has called for the withdrawal of his name from the list.

Continue Reading

Latest from DDM TV

Latest Updates

Police Arrest Fake Doctor as Woman Dies During Abortion

Trump Orders Review of 55 Million US Visa Holders in Mega Crackdown

2027: ADC Coalition Deceiving Nigerians – Baba-Ahmed

Tinubu Secures Fresh $238m Loan from Japan

‘Gate of Hell’ Will Open on Gaza’– Israeli Defence Issues Finally Warning to Hamas

NAFDAC Raises Alarm as Fake Cowbell Milk Floods Nigerian Markets

‘Misplaced Priority’: Peter Obi Blasts FG’s ₦142bn Bus Terminal Project

Why I’ll never encourage my son to visit Nigeria — Taribo West

Hardship: Man commits suicide in Imo

Canada Announces Permanent Residence Lottery Results for Foreign Workers

Subscribe to DDM Newsletter for Latest News

Trending

Copyright © 2023 -2024 Diaspora Digital Media (DDM) www.diasporadigitalmedia.com. All Rights Reserved . NOTE: All opinion articles published on Diaspora Digital Media are ENTIRELY those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the publishers.

Get Notifications from DDM News Yes please No thanks