The Lagos State High Court in Ikeja has adjourned proceedings in a N1 billion defamation lawsuit filed by renowned human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), and his son, Folarin Falana, popularly known as Falz. The case, which is against social media influencer Martins Otse, alias VeryDarkBlackMan, has been rescheduled for February 19, 2025.
Justice A.A. Adeyemi issued the adjournment on Thursday to allow for the hearing of a preliminary objection filed by Otse’s legal counsel, Marvin Omorogbe. The objection challenges both the competence of the suit and the court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter.
The plaintiffs, Femi and Folarin Falana, initiated the legal action after Otse published a video on his social media platforms accusing the duo of receiving a N10 million bribe from Idris Okuneye, popularly known as Bobrisky, to manipulate the course of justice. Describing the allegations as baseless and defamatory, the Falanas are seeking N500 million each in damages, totaling N1 billion.
In addition to monetary compensation, the plaintiffs are demanding a public apology and the retraction of the alleged defamatory video. The video, they argue, has not only tarnished their reputations but also caused significant emotional and professional harm.
During a previous hearing on October 14, 2024, the court had ordered Otse to remove the contentious video and refrain from making further defamatory statements against the plaintiffs. However, the influencer’s legal team has since filed an objection, seeking to have the case dismissed on technical grounds.
Speaking on the case, a source close to the Falanas described the allegations as a malicious attempt to discredit two individuals with long-standing reputations for integrity and advocacy for justice.
The adjournment gives both parties additional time to prepare their arguments for the February hearing. The outcome of the preliminary objection is expected to significantly influence the direction of the case.
This high-profile legal battle has drawn public attention, not only for the prominent figures involved but also for its implications regarding accountability and responsible use of social media. As the court deliberates, the case serves as a reminder of the growing tension between freedom of expression and the need to protect individual reputations in the digital age.
The Falanas remain firm in their pursuit of justice, vowing to hold Otse accountable for his statements. On the other hand, Otse’s legal team insists the claims against him lack merit and aims to quash the lawsuit. The February hearing will determine the next chapter in this closely watched case.
