Legal Expert Responds to VeryDarkMan’s Accusations Against Femi Falana

Human rights attorney Inibehe Effiong has addressed accusations aimed at fellow lawyer Femi Falana, made by social media influencer Martins Vincent Otse, known as VeryDarkMan.

 

Effiong pointed out that VeryDarkMan could face legal repercussions for libel.

 

In a recent post on X, he criticized VeryDarkMan for mishandling the situation and for his misunderstanding of libel laws.

 

“Claiming that Femi Falana should have contacted Bobrisky instead of you, who actually disseminated the defamatory material, shows a severe lack of knowledge regarding libel,” Effiong stated.

 

He stressed that VeryDarkMan’s personal remarks and the dissemination of defamatory audio implicated him legally.

 

Effiong noted, “Even if you wish to argue a fair comment defense in court, your personal, subjective remarks make it unlikely you would succeed. Emotional responses differ from legal considerations.”

 

He elaborated that defamation laws allow for legal action against insinuations, regardless of whether specific names are mentioned, as long as it’s clear to the public whom the comments concern.

 

“If reasonable members of society can infer that your comments allude to the claimant, and that these statements tarnish their reputation, then you are liable,” Effiong explained.

 

The controversy began when VeryDarkMan shared audio implicating Falana’s son, Folarin Falana (commonly referred to as Falz), in a discussion with Nigerian crossdresser Idris Okuneye, known as Bobrisky.

 

In this audio, Bobrisky suggested that after being convicted for misusing naira notes in April, he was arranged to serve his sentence in a private residence, allegedly with help from his godfather and a government official.

 

Bobrisky also claimed that Falz and his father, Falana, had reached out to assist him in obtaining a pardon from the Federal Government for a fee of ₦10 million.

 

In response, Falana’s legal team condemned VeryDarkMan’s post as “vicious, wicked, and reckless,” demanding an apology and retraction of the statements within 24 hours.

 

“The law does not function that way,” Effiong cautioned, responding to VeryDarkMan’s assertion that Falana should have approached Bobrisky first.

 

“Publication occurs when statements are made public or brought to the attention of others, generating a legal cause of action,” he added.

 

Effiong concluded by emphasizing that claims of bribery against a lawyer require substantial evidence to be valid.

 

“If you intend to accuse someone, especially a lawyer, of facilitating a criminal’s release or alternative incarceration, you must have credible proof to support your allegations,” he stated.