In a significant legal development, social media influencer Martins Otse, widely known as Verydarkman, is seeking to appeal a recent ruling from the Lagos High Court regarding a defamation suit involving Senior Advocate of Nigeria Femi Falana and his son, Folarin, popularly known as Falz. The appeal follows Justice Matthias Dawodu’s decision on October 14, 2024, which ordered Verydarkman to remove defamatory videos and comments targeting the legal duo.
Background of the Case
The controversy erupted over allegations that Falana and Falz had received N10 million from popular crossdresser Idris Okuneye, better known as Bobrisky, to compromise the integrity of justice. In his ruling, Justice Dawodu not only mandated the removal of the defamatory content but also placed a temporary injunction against Verydarkman, prohibiting further dissemination of similar statements on his social media platforms until the case is fully heard.
Seeking Judicial Review
In response to the court’s ruling, Verydarkman filed two motions seeking permission to appeal the decision. His application emphasizes the need for a thorough judicial review of the case, asserting that the ruling was based solely on the claimant’s affidavit. He argued that as the matter involves crucial legal questions, the appellate court’s intervention is essential to ensure justice is served.
Verydarkman’s motion, dated October 18, outlines seven key grounds for appeal. He insists that denying him the opportunity to appeal would constitute a miscarriage of justice, potentially leading to an enforcement of a decision that misapplies the law. He stated, “A refusal to grant leave may result in outcomes that may be detrimental not only to the parties involved but also to the administration of justice as a whole.”
Legal Justifications
Oladimeji Joseph, a legal practitioner who filed an affidavit in support of Verydarkman’s motions, highlighted the necessity of obtaining court leave before proceeding with an appeal. He pointed out that Verydarkman has a 14-day window from the ruling date to seek this permission. Joseph reinforced the notion that judicial discretion must be exercised judiciously, especially in cases involving potential harm to justice.
As the case unfolds, the implications of Verydarkman’s appeal could resonate beyond the individuals involved, impacting public discourse around defamation and social media accountability. The upcoming hearings will likely delve into complex legal questions, providing an opportunity for the appellate court to clarify standards in defamation cases involving public figures.
This legal battle not only highlights the intricacies of social media’s role in shaping public perception but also underscores the importance of ensuring that justice is fairly administered. As both parties await the court’s decision on the appeal, the broader legal community and the public will be closely monitoring the developments in this high-profile case.
