By Rasheed Aro
I have had the privilege of studying at Afe Babalola University, and mentored by Aare Afe Babalola SAN countless times.
In light of the recent controversy surrounding Aare & Dele Farotimi, I have come across several opinions; some from respected individuals who have now lost a part of my respect and others from those who, despite their legal education, seem to lack an understanding of the law.
While I do not claim to know much about the law, here are my submissions on this matter based on my limited knowledge below:
- Defamation as a Civil or Criminal Matter
Defamation is both a civil wrong (tort) and a criminal offense, depending on the jurisdiction and the remedy sought by the complainant. A person who feels defamed can decide to pursue civil damages or initiate criminal proceedings depending on the severity of the defamation and the punishment they seek.
However, some lawyers and activists have made misleading assertions that defamation is not a crime at all. A principal partner of a law firm once boldly declared this on social media, showing either ignorance or a casual attitude toward the profession. Statements like these make me wonder what interns and associates under such leadership are learning. As one of his habitual clients often says, “You will learn the hard way.”
- Jurisdiction & the Locus Standi of the Ekiti Magistrate Court
Defamation cases can be prosecuted outside the place of origin of the defamatory material because the “effect” of the defamation determines jurisdiction.
In this case, the book allegedly defaming Aare Afe Babalola was written and published in Lagos but is accessible worldwide both online and offline. Aare resides in Ado Ekiti, where the effects of the defamatory statements are most deeply felt on his reputation, his family, his mentees, legal products, business associates etc It is legally valid to prosecute the matter in Ekiti since the harm occurred there.
To claim that the author cannot be arrested or prosecuted in Ekiti because the book was published in Lagos is simply incorrect. The law allows the injured party to seek redress in a location where they have suffered harm.
- Decriminalization of Defamation in Lagos State
The decriminalization of defamation in Lagos State does not affect this case because the proceedings are being pursued in Ekiti, where the laws remain valid and enforceable. As stated earlier, the jurisdiction lies where the defamatory effect is felt, and Ekiti law applies in this case. - Freedom of Speech vs. Obligation to Prove Assertions
Freedom of speech is a constitutional right, but it comes with responsibilities. Anyone making allegations must be prepared to prove their claims. In this case, the defamatory statements were not casual remarks but deliberate assertions published in a book. Such statements undergo review, proofreading, and editing, showing the author’s confidence in their accuracy. Dele Farotimi, as the defendant, must now prove the truth of the assertions he made in his book, Nigeria and Its Criminal Judicial System. If he cannot, he will have to face the legal consequences of making unsubstantiated claims that harm another’s reputation. - The Arrest of Dele Farotimi
There have been claims that Farotimi was “kidnapped” or “illegally arrested,” but these allegations are baseless. Aare followed due process by filing a petition. Mr. Farotimi himself admitted in a video interview that a bench warrant was issued against him after he failed to honor court summonses in Ekiti.
A bench warrant is a lawful directive issued when a defendant refuses to appear in court. Whether the matter is civil or criminal, it is the defendant’s duty to appear in court or have legal representation. - Denial of Bail
The denial of bail in this case is legally justified. When a bench warrant is issued, the chances of securing bail are significantly diminished. Farotimi’s failure to appear in court obviously contributed to this outcome. - Unnecessary Protests
While I respect @YeleSowore , I find his protest on this matter unwarranted. What exactly is he protesting? The enforcement of a bench warrant? Justice for a defamed individual? It seems more like an opportunity to gather crowds with unclear demands. Additionally, Sowore’s media platform, Sahara Reporters, published a misleading article claiming, “King’s College London In Panic Over Afe Babalola’s Scandal.” There is no evidence of panic, and such exaggerated claims only dilute the credibility of their reporting. - Focus on Judicial Reform, Not Character Assassination
Aare Afe Babalola SAN is a living legend, an authority in law, and a man of immense integrity. While discussions about judicial reform are necessary and valid, this is something Aare himself has consistently championed but defaming a man who has dedicated his life to improving the legal system and Nigeria as a whole is both unjust and counterproductive. Aare has addressed the flaws in the judiciary extensively in his books, articles, and other writings, but always with dignity and without defaming anyone. He has spoken about these issues constructively, proposing actionable reforms instead of resorting to personal attacks. Similarly, I have taken a cue from his example in my recently published book on the 1999 Constitution, where I also discussed judicial reform and other systemic issues in a respectful and solution-oriented manner.
Instead of tearing down individuals with baseless allegations, let us focus on meaningful reforms that address the systemic issues within the judiciary. This is the constructive approach that can lead to real progress. It is time for all stakeholders to engage in constructive dialogue about judicial reforms rather than resorting to defamation and unwarranted protests. I do respect Dele Farotimi and he was indeed one of the inspiration for my recently published book.
However, I find this particular approach to be excessive and misdirected. With that in mind, I humbly appeal to Aare to reflect on how the reputation he seeks to protect could inadvertently suffer if society perceives that a prominent and vocal advocate is being stifled. It is my hope that we can all channel our efforts towards the broader and more impactful goal of judicial reform, which remains a shared priority for everyone involved.
