Akpabio and Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan showcase two routes to remedy defamation in Nigeria

The saga between Senate President Godswill Akpabio and his acolytes and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan took on new dimensions this week, revealing the differing approaches to addressing defamation cases in Nigeria.

Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan approached the courts, while Akpabio petitioned the Inspector-General of Police to initiate an investigation and arrest.

Akpoti-Uduaghan filed a N5 billion defamation suit seeking damages against Akpabio’s principal defender, Senator Onyekachi Nwebonyi, for asserting that she has six children by six different men. She contends that this statement is false and undermines her reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society.

Akpabio wrote to the IGP, Mr Kayode Egbetokun, on 3 April 2025 and copied the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Barrister Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, alleging “criminal defamation” against the suspended senator.

Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan alleged that Mr Akpabio was involved in a conspiracy with the former Kogi State Governor to assassinate her. She claimed to have reported the matter to the IGP.

In his petition, Akpabio denied the allegation and alleged that it was an attempt to incite public unrest against him.

Akpabio stated, “I write to formally bring to your attention and seek immediate investigation and prosecution of a criminally defamatory and malicious statement made against me by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, a suspended member of the Nigerian Senate on the 1st of April 2025, which was widely publicised on radio stations, televisions and newspapers, including the social media.

“In the public outburst at Kogi State while addressing her audience, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan falsely alleged that I instructed the former Governor of Kogi State, Alhaji Yahaya Bello, to ‘assassinate her in Kogi State instead of Abuja’ with the intent of making it appear that her constituents were responsible for her death.

“This statement is not only a heinous lie but a reckless and deliberate attempt to damage my reputation, endanger my life and security, and incite political unrest.”

BusinessDay checked with various authorities to enable citizens to understand the issue and its context better.

Both allege defamation and attempt to damage their reputation.

Experts told BusinessDay that when a Nigerian citizen is defamed, they have two primary legal avenues: petitioning the Inspector General of Police (IGP) for criminal prosecution or filing a civil lawsuit in court.

Barrister Mike Asuquo, who practises in Calabar and Lagos, stated: “It is ordinarily a civil matter – between persons or groups or institutions. This takes filing a suit in court to ask for damages. Where a criminal breach is also inherent, the complainant is bound to action the violation through a criminal process.

Often, individuals close to authority choose to act using the state’s instrumentality —without which a criminal defamation action cannot survive. This is because a crime is seen as an action against the state.

In saner climes, the tendency is to pursue the action as a civil matter.

Mr. Asuquo added, “Trust the Nigerian situation and the unfortunate state of our justice system, where those with a modicum of authority seek justice through the instrumentality of the state, resulting in the subversion of justice in the process.”

Mr Chukwumah Nwokoh, an Abuja-based journalist and communication consultant, stated that “the standard for every sane clime where there are abuses is to go to court. Seeking the IGP’s intervention is the recourse of people in government and the wealthy.”

Barrister Ekeleme Emeruwa spoke directly to the legal situation.

“Defamation is a civil wrong. The police have no authority in civil matters. Filing a suit is your best option. Petitioning the IGP will undermine your purpose.”

Communication consultant and President of the Association of Political Consultants in Africa, Ms. Temitope Lakisokun, responded: “I will ask around, but common sense suggests that libel and slander are civil matters, not criminal ones. Given that the colonisers provided us with our copy-and-paste legal system, I assume the same applies across the Commonwealth.”

They provided a comparative analysis of both routes alongside Commonwealth and global standards.

COMPARATIVE APPROACHES TO DEFAMATION REMEDY

Petitioning the IGP (Criminal Defamation)

Legal Basis:

Nigeria’s Criminal Code Act (southern states) and Penal Code Law (northern states) criminalise defamation. For example, Section 375 of the Criminal Code imposes up to two years’ imprisonment for publishing false defamatory material, while Section 392 of the Penal Code prescribes fines or imprisonment.

The Cybercrimes Act 2015 also criminalises online defamation (Section 24), which can lead to investigations by law enforcement.
Process:

The victim files a petition with the police, who may arrest and charge the accused. This has been the standard approach by the Nigerian Police.

The police investigate and forward the case to the Office of the Public Prosecutor for trial in a Magistrate Court. Meanwhile, they would have arrested the person involved.

Pros:

Deters widespread publication of defamatory content through the threat of criminal penalties.

It may resolve cases faster if the accused opts for an out-of-court settlement to avoid prosecution.

Cons:

A chilling effect on free speech: Criminal defamation laws are criticised for stifling public discourse, as seen in cases like Prof. Zainab-Duke Abiola’s lawsuit against the IGP.

Risk of abuse: Politicians and elites often weaponise criminal defamation to silence critics, contrary to international human rights norms.

B. Filing a Civil Lawsuit

Legal Basis:

Under Nigerian tort law, defamation (libel or slander) allows victims to claim damages or injunctive relief.

Key requirements for success:

The statement was defamatory (lowered the plaintiff’s reputation).

The statement referred to the plaintiff.

The statement was published to a third party.

Process:

Depending on jurisdiction, the plaintiff hires a lawyer to file a suit in the State High Court or Federal High Court.

Remedies include monetary compensation (e.g., N5billion sought by Akpoti-Uduaghan) and court orders to retract defamatory content.

Pros:

Presumed damages: Libel is actionable per se, meaning plaintiffs need not prove financial loss (e.g., Chief Tony Okoroji v. Onyeka Onwenu.

Flexibility: Courts may grant injunctions to halt further publication 1.

Cons:

Time-consuming: Cases can drag on for years due to judicial backlogs.

Costly: Legal fees and procedural delays may deter low-income plaintiffs.

Commonwealth and Global Standards

Commonwealth Trends:

Abolition of criminal defamation: Countries like Ghana and Sri Lanka have repealed criminal defamation laws, aligning with the Commonwealth Press Union’s recommendations to protect free expression.

Civil focus: The UK and Canada prioritise civil remedies, as criminal sanctions are deemed disproportionate and prone to abuse.

U.S. Perspective:

First Amendment safeguards: Under 28 U.S. Code §4102, U.S. courts refuse to enforce foreign defamation judgments (e.g., from Nigeria) unless they align with First Amendment free speech protections.

International Human Rights Norms:

The UN Human Rights Committee and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights oppose criminal defamation, arguing it violates freedom of expression and impedes democracy.