- It’s Kangaroo judgement – Adams
- Court should expedite execution of judgement – Fasehun
The internecine strife within the Oodua People’s Congress that had, in the past, led to loss of lives between the two main factions may have resurfaced again.
This time, the crisis has shifted to the courts and the founder and president of the OPC, Dr. Frederick Fasehun has emerged temporarily victorious over his rival, Gani Adams, the national co-coordinator of the group. Gani has, however, appealed the judgement.
In a libel suit filed in the Abuja Judicial Division before Honourable Justice S.E. Adetoyinbo in 2013, Dr. Fasehun complained that an interview granted by Adams to a national news magazine was libelous and defamatory.
Consequently, he demanded for damages in the sum of N 10,000,000,000.00 (Ten billion naira)
In the judgment, delivered on June 16, 2016, Justice Adetoyinbo ruled that: ”The first and second defendants (Gani Adams) should pay jointly and severally the sum of one hundred million naira (N 100,000,000.00) to the plaintiff as exemplary damage for the injury to the plaintiff’s reputation, which was damaged and for the unwanted assault on the plaintiff’s reputation and pride as a result of the libelous, publication in the weekly magazine published on the 26th day of August, 2013.”
In his reaction, Adams said he had appealed the judgement, which he described as: “a Kangaroo judgment Fasehun got from the court. It is stale news and I will not comment on it. I can see you on any other matter but not the judgment.”
Fasehun, on his part, said he wished that the judiciary would put in place a mechanism that would ensure expeditious execution of judgment.
“A situation in which a judgement is given by a competent court of jurisdiction and its execution is slow is not good enough,” he said.
In the said publication with the headline, ”Fasehun can kill and destroy because of power, money and women,” Adams was quoted as saying that “Dr Fasehun was callous and that he could kill, maim and destroy because of money, power and women. I told them that I know him very well and that they should be prepared to make sacrifices.”
Justice Aladetoyinbo ruled that: ”The Court has no difficulty in affirming that the libel published of the plaintiff is reckless and deliberate, the purpose of the publication was for the first defendant to gain economically from the scandalous news, which would make their newspaper to sell more and therefore make more money.”
During the hearing, Adams had, through his lawyer, filed a notice of preliminary objection wherein he stated in part: ”He is indeed the National Co-coordinator of the Oodua People’s Congress while the plaintiff is the president, although both of them have and maintain their different camps of loyalists and have different operational structures.
“In so far the words complained of and set out in the statement of claim consists of statements of fact, they are true in substance and in fact, and in so far as they consist of expression of opinion, they are fair comment on the said facts which are on a matter of public opinion.
“The defendant states that the plaintiff’s claim is frivolous, gold digging outrageous and without substance and that same be dismissed with substantial costs against the plaintiff.”
But the court ruled that: “Notice of preliminary objection and statement of defence cannot be merged together as statement of defence.”
While giving award, Justice Adetoyinbo stated: “Such an award must be adequate to repair the injury to the plaintiff’s reputation, which was damaged. The award must be such as would atone for the assault on the plaintiff’s character and pride, which were unjustifiably invaded and it must reflect the reaction of the law to the imprudent and illegal exercise in the course of which the libel was unleashed by the defendant.
