By Kingsley Okechukwu Isicheli, Esq
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/NBBSPIDEL.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
INTRODUCTION
Defamation is one of the components of law of tort. The law of tort, in an ordinary meaning, is a civil wrong that culminates in loss or harm of another individual. The three general categories of torts are intentional, negligence, and strict liability. Intentional tort is a wrongful act committed on purpose and the wrongdoer (defendant) is fully aware of his own actions. Examples of intentional tort are defamation, false imprisonment, assault, battery, conversion etc. Negligence is when the wrongdoer (defendant) who has a duty of care, act in an unsafe and unreasonable manner leading to some sort of harm to the victim (claimant). Examples are medical malpractice or negligence, vehicle accidents, slip and fall accidents etc. And then there is strict liability torts which suggests that the intention of the defendant is immaterial to the harm suffered by the claimant. It is a liability under which the defendant is legally responsible for his action, absence of fault or intention notwithstanding.
Proceeding from the above brief background, it is has been understandably made clear that defamation is an aspect of law of tort. It is worth establishing that tortious defamation encompasses libel and slander. This implies that defamation is a joint name for two torts of libel and slander. The case of Oladipupo v. Aderemi enunciated the common law distinction between both.
Defamation suits have always been instituted in our courts. However, the two recent famous ones are the Dele Farotimi following his book NIGERIA AND ITS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM and that of senator Natasha/the senate president, Akpabio, instituted by his wife.
The events and drama that characterised the Dele’s case led to the furiosity and upsetion of many, questioning the arrest, arraignment and detention of Dele. In their view, the police involvement is underwhelmingly deliberate to intimidate and harassment Dele in a case which ought to be a civil matter. This view was not peculiar with “laymen” but also expressed by some persons within the legal community. The first matter arising herein is to acquaint ourselves with the understanding that defamatory content comes with both civil and criminal elements in Nigeran jurisprudence.
Understanding Defamation
Defamation is an express or implied communication that injures the reputation of the victim (defendant) and causes a legally redressable injury. A defamatory statement is an assertion that contain elements which are injurious to the victim’s reputation, lowers him before members of the society, exposes him to hatred and ridicule. It casts aspersion on the character of the individual and as has been highlighted, it is the nature of a libel or a slander, see the case of Okoye v Nwoye (2006)9 NWLR (pt.986) 529. Libel is a defamatory statement in a documentary form and while slander is by the words of the mouth. The statement must constitute a negative affection on the reputation of the person defamed. In the case of Chilkied Security Services & Dog Farms Ltd v. Schlumberger (Nig) Ltd & Anr (2018) LPELR-SC.85/2007 , it was held that defamation is an injury occasioned to another person’s reputation by either written or spoken words. To particularise defamation, the statement must either lower the victim, cause members of the society to avoid the victim, exposes the victim to hatred, discredit the victim’s reputation etc. The court has said in the case of Bakare v Ishola that mere words amounting to vulgar abuse in a public place following an altercation between individuals cannot constituted a defamatory statement, hence, not actionable in law. Juxtaposing the above case with Ibeanu v. Uba where the defendant’s alleged that a party to the suit brought a thieve to the other party’s shop to steal her goat was held to be defamatory. The court emphasised that such allegation is incriminating and harmful to the reputation of the individual.
However, there are instances where the victim’s (claimant) reputation may not be necessarily affected, yet, defamatory suit can be sustained if elements of imputation in the defendant’s statement is proved. In the United States’ case of New York Times Co v Sullivan, it was established that defamation can be sustained if the statement was made with actual malice or reckless disregard to whether or not the assertion is false. Furthermore, innuendos can be actionable in defamation. However, the claimant has the responsibility to demonstrate that the innuendo is injurious and defamatory in nature, see the case of Johnson v Daily Times of Nigeria Ltd.
The legal framework of defamation in Nigeria
The immediate contention of many in Dele’s experience referenced above was the involvement of the police in a mere civil case. This is utterly a wrong impression as defamation in Nigerian jurisprudence is a dual offense. In Nigeria, defamation can be civil wrong as well as criminal act and none of the two elements can operate as an estoppel to the other. In other words, an alleged defamed individual can institute either criminal case or civil case or both against the perpetrator. Tortious defamation is the civil element of defamation action that seeks to protect the reputation and the good name -if you like- of the defamed. The outcome of this civil wrong is the award of damage against wrongdoer in favour of the person defamed.
However, the crime element of defamation is as provided in Nigerian criminal laws, thus, criminal proceedings is permitted against the offender. Defamation is explicitly defined in section 373 of Criminal Code (applicable in the south) as a matter likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him or her to hatred, contempt or ridicule or likely to damage any person in his profession or trade by injury to his or her reputation. The Act goes on to say in section 375 that any person who publishes any defamatory matter is guilty of a misdemeanor and is liable to imprisonment for one year; and any person who publishes any defamatory matter knowing it to be false, is liable to imprisonment for two years. In a related development, the Penal Code (applicable in north and FCT) in “sections 391 to 395” also made reference to criminal defamation. Similarly, section 24(1) of the Cybercrimes Act criminalizes sending a message by a computer system which is ‘grossly offensive, pornographic, or of an indecent, obscene, or menacing character’, or to send a message knowing it to be false for the purpose of “causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will, or needless anxiety to another”, or to cause such a message to be sent.
Contrary to the criminalisation of defamation in Nigeria copiously adumbrated above, states like Lagos and Edo -I believe- have decriminalised the same. Following the modernisation of the legal framework of criminal law in Lagos state in 2011, defamation ceases to be a criminal offense but a civil wrong in Lagos state. This position was upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Aviomoh v. Commissioner of Police & Anor (2021).
Who can sue for defamation
The principle is that defamation is a personal action, hence, it is the individual or organisation who is defamed has the locus standi to sue. The claimant must been personally affected by the defamatory statement directly or indirectly to exercise the authority to sue, as held in the case of Izejiobi v Ebgebu (2016) LPELR-40507 (CA). See also Oduntan v General Oil Ltd (1995) LPELR-2249(SC).
Perhaps, I was fascinated by Akpabio’s wife initiative to institute an action against Natasha for defamation. I am not unmindful of the fact that I am not privy to the court process, consequently, does not have the content. However, it appears to be a blatantly implausible claim. And so, if I were Natasha’s counsel, I will question Akpabio’s wife locus standi. The court has emphasised in the case of Oju v Unilorin & Ors (2023) LPELR-60788 (CA) that there is no class action in action for defamation but a personal one. In Ogundare v Ogundare (2006) 11 NWLR (pt992) 398 it was held that the burden of proof in a defamation case rests on the claimant to demonstrate that the statement made is damaging to his reputation and not that of another. See also the case of The Sketch Publishing Co Ltd & Anor v Ajagbemokeferi (1989) LPELR 3207 (SC). The court never envisaged that the burden of proof can be shifted to a proxy to enable Akpabio’s wife to assume locus in that instance. Should the counsel succeed to sway the court with an objection for want of locus, it becomes a jurisdictional issue which goes to the root of the case, thus, can be struck out. See the notorious case of Madukolu v Nkemdilim
Decriminalisation of defamation
Defamation has been decriminalised in different jurisdictions globally. The immediate emphasis will be in England where criminal defamation was hitherto part their law under Defamation Act 1952. Under this Act defamation could be both a civil wrong and a criminal offense, occasioning the possibilities of prosecuting and convicting someone for defamation and also pursue the civil wrong.
Interestingly, the coming into effect of Defamation Act 2013 abolished the criminal element of defamation in England and Wales. In other words, defamation is no longer punishable by any criminal sanctions in England and Wales The case of Sim v. Stretch was to the effect that defamation as now a civil wrong, perhaps, the remedy should be damages for harm to reputation and not criminal sanctions. See also the case of Lord McAlpine v. Bercow. The implication is that defamation suit is now prosecuted in the civil courts which focuses on civil remedies. Similarly, the case of Flood v. Times Newspapers Ltd highlighted the need of protecting an individual’s reputation from harm by way of civil context.
Defamation Act 2013 introduced different changes on the fabrics of defamation, including claims. One of which was to raise the threshold for what constitutes serious harm to the claimant’s reputation for the purposes of claim and damages. The burden of proof becomes heavy on the claimant before the civil court.
Conclusion
Defamation, as has been significantly demonstrated, is a component of law of tort and tort, in a nutshell, is a civil wrong which occurs when someone unfairly causes another person to suffer loss or harm. It is a wrong committable against an individual or organisation which attracts civil remedy. This excludes few jurisdictions who have maintained it in their law as dual wrong.
The composite elements of the law of defamation in Nigeria presupposes that she should deliberately take the pathway of England and many other jurisdictions globally who have decriminalised defamation. One of the arguments put forward in this regard, is that decriminalisation of defamation protects freedom of speech -which I am trying to censor- and reduces the possible misuse of the law of defamation against the population.
It is my profound belief that defamation should be decriminalised in Nigeria, thus, I give maximum regards to Lagos and Edo States (I believe) for so doing. I celebrate them and submit that defamation is another segment of our jurisprudence that may require critical examination for a comprehensive review at the federal level.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
______________________________________________________________________
