₦airaland Forum

Freedom of Speech Is Not a License to Defame: A Rebuttal to Femi Falana’s Misplaced Reliance on Nwankwo v. State

By Nnamdi Ikechi

In the wake of the criminal defamation charges filed against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, human rights lawyer Femi Falana, SAN, offered a spirited defence rooted in constitutional liberty. Citing the Court of Appeal’s decision in Arthur Nwankwo v. The State (1985) 6 NCLR 228, Falana urged the Attorney-General of the Federation to withdraw the charges, suggesting that they amount to a violation of the right to freedom of expression. While the intentions behind his intervention may be noble, the legal reasoning is flawed, outdated, and ultimately unconvincing in the context of the current case.

1. Falana’s Misapplication of Nwankwo v. State

In Nwankwo v. State, the Court of Appeal declared certain provisions of the Criminal Code relating to sedition as unconstitutional for infringing upon the right to freedom of expression under the 1979 Constitution. The court emphasized that public officers must tolerate criticism, even if it is harsh or unflattering.

However, the charges preferred against Senator Natasha are not for sedition. Rather, they are for criminal defamation under Sections 391 and 392 of the Penal Code, applicable in the Federal Capital Territory. Section 391 criminalizes the making of false imputations intended to harm another’s reputation, while Section 392 prescribes punishment of up to two years' imprisonment or a fine, or both.

The Nwankwo judgment never invalidated these defamation provisions, and Falana’s reliance on that case is a clear misapplication. Criminal defamation remains valid and enforceable law in Nigeria, distinct from the sedition laws that were struck down decades ago.

2. Ignoring the Modern Legal Context: Cybercrime and Media Transmission

Falana’s position overlooks the evolution of criminal jurisprudence in Nigeria. Today’s legal ecosystem includes the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015, which explicitly addresses offences committed through electronic and digital platforms.

The defamatory allegations made by Senator Natasha concerning assassination plots and organ trafficking allegedly involving Senate President Akpabio and former Governor Yahaya Bello, were not whispered in private. They were made during a live broadcast on Channels Television and repeated in digital correspondence, amplifying their impact and legal ramifications.

Digital publication introduces additional layers of liability and wider jurisdictional reach. These are not mere political criticisms; they are allegations of grave criminal conduct made without substantiated evidence, well within the scope of criminal defamation under extant Nigerian laws.

3. Free Speech is Not Absolute Under Nigerian Law

It is important to affirm that freedom of speech is a cornerstone of democracy. But, as with all rights, it has boundaries. Section 39(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides that freedom of expression may be restricted “in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.”

The right to protect one’s reputation is a legitimate legal interest recognized globally. In the United Kingdom, the United States, and other democracies, defamation laws - civil and criminal - coexist with freedom of expression to create a balanced legal framework.

In this case, Senator Natasha is not being prosecuted for critiquing government policy or challenging official actions. She is being prosecuted for making specific, defamatory, and criminal accusations against named individuals, which, if proven to be false and malicious, clearly breach the law.

4. The Attorney-General’s Actions Are Lawful and Justifiable

The prosecution initiated by the Attorney-General of the Federation is backed by a police investigation that reportedly found prima facie evidence suggesting that Senator Natasha's statements were not only false but made with reckless disregard for the truth.

This is not akin to the Nwankwo scenario, where no investigation established malice or falsehood. Here, the law has taken its course, starting from a petition to police investigation, to prosecutorial review, consistent with due process.

The idea that this prosecution is an attempt to gag dissent is speculative at best and deceptive at worst. The focus should be on the truthfulness and intent behind Senator Natasha’s statements, not an abstract invocation of constitutional rights divorced from factual realities.

Conclusion

Femi Falana, SAN, deserves respect for his longstanding contributions to constitutional law and human rights in Nigeria. However, on this matter, his interpretation is both legally and contextually misplaced.

The charges against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan are not about silencing criticism or dissent. They concern the responsible use of free speech, especially in an era where reputations can be destroyed in minutes through digital platforms. The law cannot and should not- stand idly by when false and injurious allegations are made against citizens, public figures, or not.

Falana’s invocation of Nwankwo v. State may serve as a powerful soundbite, but it does little to shield defamatory speech from lawful accountability. The courtroom, not the court of public opinion is the proper forum for Senator Natasha to defend her statements.

Let the law take its course.


Mr. Nnamdi Ikechi writes from Lagos. He is a public affairs analyst and Political commentator.

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: PROSECUTION OF SENATOR NATASHA AKPOTI UDUAGHAN IS LEGAL, PROPER, AND NOT A GAG ON FREE SPEECH

Recent public commentary on the Federal Government’s decision to file criminal charges against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has been riddled with misconceptions, political undertones, and an unfortunate misrepresentation of the facts. Contrary to the sensational narrative being peddled, the decision to prosecute Senator Akpoti is neither a vendetta nor a suppression of dissent. It is a lawful and constitutionally grounded action based on verifiable facts and due process.

Senator Akpoti had publicly alleged, without credible evidence, that Senate President Godswill Akpabio was involved in organ harvesting, and that the same Senator Godswill Akpabio and Yahaya Bello, former Governor of Kogi had plotted to assassinate her in Kogi State. These are not mere criticisms or political rhetoric, they are grave and potentially destabilizing criminal allegations.

Following petitions from the accused parties, the Nigeria Police Force conducted a thorough investigation. The outcome of that investigation concluded that Senator Akpoti’s statements were false and defamatory. Consequently, the matter was referred to the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), who, in line with his constitutional powers under Section 174 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), filed a three-count criminal charge against her.

The AGF’s decision was not arbitrary. It followed an independent police investigation and legal review. It is crucial to stress that the Nigerian Constitution empowers the AGF to institute criminal proceedings in the name of the Federal Government. This is not an abuse of power, it is the exercise of legal responsibility. The law does not, and must not, shield anyone from accountability simply because they are a senator or a woman.

To suggest that this prosecution is a method of silencing dissent is to ignore the dangerous precedent that unsubstantiated and defamatory claims can be made with impunity. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right, but it is not absolute. It does not extend to making baseless, damaging, and malicious allegations against others without consequences.

Let it be clear: this case is not about silencing a woman or a political opponent. It is about the rule of law. Senator Akpoti is being called to account not for expressing an opinion, but for making specific, serious criminal accusations which, after investigation, were found to be false.

Framing this prosecution as an attack on gender or political expression is both irresponsible and misleading. It trivializes genuine cases of political persecution and gender-based suppression. The notion that every action taken against a female public official amounts to misogyny undermines the integrity of legitimate legal processes and disrespects the principles of equality before the law.

In a democracy, the law must apply equally to all, regardless of status, gender, or political affiliation. The Federal Government has acted within its legal bounds, following due process, and in accordance with the principles of justice. Turning a legal matter rooted in facts and evidence into a political or gender crusade is not only disingenuous, it is dangerous.

Rather than promote a culture where defamation is cloaked as activism, Nigerians must support a system where accountability, truth, and justice prevail. No one is above the law, and that is the hallmark of a true democracy.

Let Senator Natasha Akpoti Uduaghan come forward and present evidence of those grave allegations and turn the table against the complainants. It is in her own interest.


Mr Nnamdi Ikechi writes from Lagos.

Opinion- calls for senate president Akpabio to step aside are baseless

Opinion Cells for senate president Akpabio to step Aside are baseless

A MISUNDERSTOOD AKPABIO

In recent times, President of the Senate, Senator Godswill Akpabio may have been in the news for what would advert the minds of many as the wrong reasons. And that is the image his traducers want to paint of the good man . They want to create for him a public perception of a villain who is incorrigibly bad and incapable of any good despite his robust record of impact on people's lives and extensive benevolence that replete his history.

Interestingly, these ill informed and impish views are not only contrived untruths with factual deficiencies , they are also deliberately intended to impugn his character for cheap political gains, array him against the people and discredit him to reduce his electoral and national value .

In recent times, every public utterance by Akpabio no matter how well intentioned is deliberately skewed to meet a predetermined purpose and representation. It is why the statement of the MD of NDDC at an event in Portharcourt which was in every sense innocent was mischievously quoted out of context and ascribed to Senator Akpabio to make him look bad and against the people. How can Senator Akpabio be against the people? Even his service pedigree from his life in the private sector, to that of public service beginning from when he was commissioner, two terms governor, Minority Leader , Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and now President of the Senate, acquit him as a man of the people . The prejudiced views which cast him as an Aristocrat on a high horse who looks down on the people and mocks them are of course untenable in every respect .

The serving President of the Senate is one leader who had long chosen to be different. His humble and spartan beginning had built in him the virtue of empathy while growing up. It also inculcated in him a surfeit of other values some of which are humility, compassion, generosity, hardwork and the fear of God. Akpabio is an embodiment of the aforementioned sterling values. And these values are at the core of our value system which he is a part of. It is difficult to find people who are strong adherents to the value system stray into mindless absurdly in their public conducts except in minor cases of infallibility that are common to all humans . It is such a minor infallibility that Akpabio's traducers often magnify to have his pound of flesh. But because his political net worth is more than their shenanigans and pedestrian darts , Nigerians still have faith in his leadership of the Senate.

Reflecting on what I call political net worth, one cannot fail to see his bridge building skill. Akpabio is one politician who receives a defeaning ovation of almost equal measure in any part of the country he visits. He is loved and always celebrated lavishly anywhere he finds himself.

This bridge building skill is eloquent in the synergy that underlines the relationship between the Executive and the current National Assembly which Akpabio is Chairman. The relationship has led to increased collaboration leading to expeditious passage of Bills especially the 2024 budget that saw members of the National Assembly working round the clock to ensure its timeous passage.

But in the face of this active collaboration, the National Assembly has not compromised its independence. It has continued to be on the side of the people and in strict observance of the principle of separation of powers. This, it has done through opposing policies the Senate suspects would bring more hardship to the people. The case of electricity tariff and other interventions like labour unrest and minimum wage saga are testimonies of Akpabio's commitment to the people. And so let no one mislead anyone with the disinformation that Akpabio is anti- people.

It is unfortunate that many see constant frictions or confrontation between the executive and Legislature as the only way the latter could be seen as being effective. What many do not know is that those confrontations are driven more by self interest and ego and not the collective good of the people. And in acting in that manner, the people suffer as they are denied the benefits of good governance. A legislature that is working for the people is sober, reflective and farsighted. It weighs the implication of an action and makes decisions that side with the interest of the people. That is the 10th Senate I see under the leadership of Senator Akpabio. It is not given to unnecessary wranglings and confrontation but engagement that would pave the way for a new Nigeria.

Toeing this egalitarian path has not fared well with some political elites who have always profited from political storms between the executive and the legislature. For changing the crude dynamics and ensuring a paradigm shift, he must be scapegoated even in common human frailties. But whose interests are these people hounding and haunting Akpabio serving? Certainly not the Nigerian people's interest.

I dare to add that the President of the Senate may also be a target of the hegemonic politics of a section of the North which feels that it should be in charge of the legislature as a tool to rein in the President and blackmail him at will. Such moves have at least been witnessed in the actions of some Northern senators. The protection of Akpabio is inextricably bound to the preservation of the polity and in harmony. Anything that would harm the stability of the 10th Senate under Akpabio would widen the nation's dichotomy and introduce mutual suspicion across the political spectrum.

At this dire time of the nation's history, what the country needs are patriots, not ethnic or tribal champions. We need Nigerians who think Nigeria before their ethnic/tribal affiliations. We need leaders who are ready to subsume ethnic cleavages for national interest. We need leaders who are ready to stand shoulder to shoulder to salvage this Nation and restore her to the laudable dream of our founding fathers. Akpabio is a spectacular example of this national ideal. He is broad-minded, accommodating, receptive, sensitive and at home with every section of the country. Nigeria would not have asked for a better head of the Legislature at a time like this. Let us rally around him , support him and maximize his experience and leadership potential for national development.

Joe Peter is a public affairs analyst