APC man obtains N35 million libel judgement against Sahara Reporters

The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, Abuja, has awarded N35 million damages against Sahara Reporters in a defamation case filed against the platform by a top All Progressives Congress (APC) member, Nasiru Danu.

Mr Danu had sued Sahara Reporters in February 2022 over its articles published on 5 March 2021 linking him with an alleged N51 billion fraud at the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) and a subsequent one published on 9 March 2021 alleging that he had escaped to Dubai to avoid investigation.

Sahara Reporters criticised the judgement in response to PREMIUM TIMES enquiries on Thursday, maintaining that the suit leading to the verdict was never brought to its attention to enable it to defend itself.

The court delivered the judgement on 30 September, according to the certified true copy seen by PREMIUM TIMES.

The judge, Mohammed Zubairu, ruled that Sahara Reporters must pay a cumulative N35 million to Mr Danu as compensation for the injuries he suffered as a result of the articles, which he denied. The awards comprise N20 million as general damages for the two publications and additional N15 million as aggravated and exemplary damages.

Furthermore, the judge ordered Sahara Reporters to retract the publication and publish an unreserved apology to Mr Danu on its website.

The judge noted that Sahara Reporters failed to defend the case, adding, “It is to be noted that the failure or refusal of the Defendant to justify this publication against the claimant and also its further failure to retract or take down the publication has further proved the malicious intent of that publication.”

“Consequently, the sole issue for determination is accordingly resolved in the affirmative. I am convinced beyond any doubt that the claimant has satisfied the requirements of the law in proving his claim. against the Defendant,” the judge ruled.

He said after reviewing the totality of the claimant’s pleadings, evidence and his lawyer’s submissions in support of his claims, he found that the case succeeded on its merit#, notwithstanding that the case was not defended by Sahara Reporters.

“I am of the firm view that the claimant has complied with all the elements required in proof of the tort of defamation not just because the defendant decided to stand aloof throughout the span of this suit but because the Claimant has led credible evidence to establish that.

“There was a publication; ii) the publication was authored by the Defendant; iii) the publication refers to the Claimant; iv) the publication contains disparaging assertions against the Claimant; v) the publication is false and; vi) the publication was communicated to a third party via the internet (which qualifies as communication to the whole world), ” the judgement read.

Defamation Suit

Mr Danu sued Sahara Reporters over its article published on 5 March, accusing him and some top officials of the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) of defrauding the Nigerian government of N51 billion meant for the improvement of the NCS.

Mr Danu was also described as an “arrowhead in what is now known in some quarters as President Muhammadu Buhari’s oil mafia group.”

In another article published on 9 March, Sahara Reporters stated that the APC man had fled the country for Dubai, the United Arab Emirates, to “avoid being investigated.”

Following the publications, Mr Danu in a letter sent by his lawyer, Bode Olanipekun of Wole Olanipekun & Co., to Sahara Reporters, denied all allegations levelled against him in the reports.

He also demanded the retraction of the publication from Sahara Reporters’ official website and Twitter account.

On 18 February 2022, Mr Danu filed a N6 billion defamation suit against Sahara Reporters as damages for the publication and circulation of libel contained in the articles written and published by Sahara Reporters.

Sahara Reporters reacts

In a WhatsApp chat with this reporter, the publisher of Sahara Reporters, Omoyele Sowore stated that the publication was not notified of a lawsuit against it.

Similarly, Sahara Reporters’ lawyer, Inibehe Effiong, in a telephone interview, noted that the publication did not receive a notice of a lawsuit, nor was it aware of the judgement.

“I am not aware of any such case nor am I aware of the judgement given in respect of such a case. Sahara reporters is also not aware of it. If someone is filing an action against an organisation or a company or individual, the defendant ought to be given notice,” he said.

READ ALSO: Media ombudsman directs Daily Trust to apologise over Samoa agreement publication

Responding to the court’s statement that Sahara Reporters was served through substituted means, Mr Effiong said that whatever method was adopted did not bring the case to Sahara Reporter’s notice.

“The law is that even if you are serving by substituted means, the mode of service must be one that is capable of bringing that suit to the notice of the defendant,” he said.