The Vice-Chancellor of the University of Lagos (UNILAG), Professor Folasade Ogunsola, has threatened to institute a ₦1 billion defamation suit against online media organisation NaijaOnPoint over a publication linking her administration to alleged financial irregularities involving hundreds of millions of naira at the university.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
Ogunsola, through her legal representatives, accused the publication of falsely portraying her as a dishonest administrator who condoned financial misconduct and the misappropriation of public funds.
However, the management of NaijaOnPoint has confirmed that it removed the disputed report from its website and social media platforms, maintaining that the article was originally published by another news organisation and that it considered the matter resolved following its response to the Vice-Chancellor’s lawyers.
In a letter dated October 29, 2026, addressed to the Editor-in-Chief and Publisher of NaijaOnPoint, Ogunsola, through her counsel, Professor Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, of Bayo Osipitan & Co., demanded the immediate removal of the publication, a retraction and a public apology within 48 hours of receipt of the letter.
The disputed publication, titled “Citadel of Criminals: Under VC Folashade Ogunsola, UNILAG Staff Pocketed N397million In Irregular Payments While N434million In Cash Advances Went Unretired,” was said to have appeared on NaijaOnPoint’s website and its social media accounts on X and LinkedIn.
The report contained allegations concerning the management of the university’s finances, including claims that staff received approximately ₦397.5 million in irregular payments while ₦434.8 million in cash advances remained unretired.
A report containing the same allegations was published by Secrets Reporters on October 24, 2026, as the third instalment of an investigative series examining alleged financial irregularities at UNILAG.
The publication claimed that the university recorded ₦355.6 million in payments without supporting documents and ₦178 million in unapproved allowances paid to staff members.
It also alleged that store items valued at approximately ₦121.7 million were not properly reflected in the university’s inventory records.
Other allegations included ₦116.4 million in payments said to have violated the Federal Government’s electronic payment policy and ₦82.9 million in cash advances allegedly granted above approved limits.
The publication further raised questions about withdrawals from university accounts, travel grants allegedly paid without proper authorisation and expenditure on international trips purportedly undertaken without the required approvals.
The allegations formed part of a wider series of reports by Secrets Reporters concerning the financial administration of the university during Ogunsola’s tenure.
In two earlier publications, the online investigative platform alleged that UNILAG failed to disclose contracts valued at approximately ₦7.83 billion on Nigeria’s Open Contracting Portal.
It also raised questions about the alleged failure to remit internally generated revenue to government coffers, with the earlier publication citing approximately ₦3.89 billion in its headline.
Another report questioned approximately ₦7 billion in contract expenditure, alleging that auditors could not verify whether the contracts had been executed in accordance with their terms.
The publications linked the alleged irregularities to the Vice-Chancellor on the grounds that she headed the university during the financial year covered by the reported audit findings.
However, the financial allegations remain claims made in the investigative publications and have not been independently established as evidence of personal wrongdoing by Ogunsola.
In her response, the Vice-Chancellor rejected the attempt to associate her personally with the alleged misconduct of unidentified university employees.
Her lawyers argued that the headline and contents of the publication conveyed the impression that she was responsible for or knowingly permitted the alleged misuse of public funds.
According to Osipitan, the report portrayed his client as a dishonest university administrator who presided over an institution populated by criminals.
He maintained that the allegations were capable of damaging her personal and professional reputation, particularly because they were presented in a manner suggesting that her involvement in the alleged financial improprieties had already been established.
The senior lawyer explained that Ogunsola did not oppose legitimate investigative journalism, fair comment or responsible reporting on matters of public interest.
However, he insisted that the publication crossed the line by associating her with allegations of criminal conduct and financial impropriety without establishing her personal involvement.
The Vice-Chancellor, through her lawyers, categorically denied engaging in, authorising, participating in or knowingly facilitating any criminal activity or financial misconduct.
Her legal representatives described the publication as materially false, misleading and damaging to her reputation.
They maintained that the allegations did not establish that Ogunsola personally diverted public funds, approved unlawful payments or knowingly participated in any improper financial transaction.
The lawyers consequently demanded that NaijaOnPoint remove the disputed report from its website and every social media platform under its control.
They also requested an unequivocal retraction and public apology, insisting that the corrective publication should receive prominence and visibility comparable to those given to the original report.
In addition, the media organisation was asked to provide a written undertaking that it would not republish, reproduce or further circulate the allegations.
The solicitors also demanded a commitment that appropriate steps would be taken to prevent further dissemination of the publication through the organisation’s platforms.
Osipitan warned that failure to comply with the demands within 48 hours of receiving the letter would leave his client with no alternative but to commence legal proceedings against the company and other persons considered responsible for publishing or circulating the disputed allegations.
The legal representatives also threatened to refer the matter to the appropriate law enforcement authorities for investigation and possible prosecution.
In advancing their position, the lawyers referred to Nigerian defamation laws and Section 24 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act, as amended.
They maintained that the publication was capable of attracting civil liability and raised issues concerning the legal consequences of communicating allegedly false and damaging information through electronic platforms.
The legal notice indicated that Ogunsola intended to seek ₦1 billion in damages if the dispute proceeded to court.
The proposed claim comprises ₦500 million in general damages and another ₦500 million in exemplary damages.
In addition to the monetary claims, the Vice-Chancellor’s lawyers proposed seeking a declaration that the publication was defamatory and injurious to her reputation.
They also indicated that the intended action would seek an order directing the removal of the report from NaijaOnPoint’s website and social media platforms.
Another proposed relief is a perpetual injunction restraining the media organisation and other persons responsible from further publishing or circulating the disputed allegations.
The legal notice nevertheless distinguished the proposed court proceedings from the immediate demand for the publication’s withdrawal, retraction and apology.
The latest development follows NaijaOnPoint’s response to the Vice-Chancellor’s legal representatives.
In an email sent to PREMIUM TIMES on Monday, November 2, 2026, the media organisation’s Head Publisher, Anthony Balogun, confirmed that the disputed report had been removed from its website and social media accounts, including X and LinkedIn.
Balogun explained that the publication was not an original investigation conducted by NaijaOnPoint but was reproduced from Secrets Reporters.
According to him, the organisation had communicated its decision to remove the report to Ogunsola’s legal representatives and received an acknowledgement of its response.
“We consider the matter resolved,” Balogun stated.
His response suggests that NaijaOnPoint regards the withdrawal of the publication and its communication with the Vice-Chancellor’s lawyers as sufficient steps towards settling the dispute.
However, the acknowledgement of the publication’s removal does not, by itself, establish that Ogunsola has formally withdrawn her legal demands or agreed to abandon the threatened ₦1 billion action.
It was also not immediately established whether NaijaOnPoint had issued the public retraction and apology demanded in the October 29 letter or provided the written undertakings requested by the lawyers.
The controversy raises questions about the responsibilities of media organisations when reproducing investigative reports originally published by other outlets.
Although NaijaOnPoint maintained that the article was obtained from Secrets Reporters, Ogunsola’s legal representatives directed their demands at the organisation over its own publication and circulation of the allegations.
Under defamation law, the fact that an allegation was first published elsewhere does not necessarily remove questions of responsibility arising from its subsequent republication.
At the same time, allegations concerning the administration of public funds remain matters of legitimate public interest, and their publication must be assessed in accordance with applicable legal principles, including defamation law, the right to reputation, freedom of expression and available defences.
The distinction between reported audit queries, administrative irregularities and established criminal wrongdoing is also central to the disagreement.
While the original investigative publications raised questions about financial documentation, contract administration, cash advances and payments made during the period under review, Ogunsola has expressly denied personal involvement in any criminal conduct or financial impropriety.
There has been no established judicial finding linking the Vice-Chancellor personally to the alleged financial misconduct described in the disputed publication.
[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
