The Federal Capital Territory High Court in Nyanya, Abuja, has issued an order restraining social media activist Martins Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), from making further defamatory publications against gospel singer Mercy Chinwo.
The ruling, delivered on Thursday, March 14, 2025, follows a lawsuit filed by Chinwo’s legal team, led by Henry Eni-Otu, over alleged false and damaging statements made by the activist on social media. Chinwo argued that the remarks negatively affected her public image and reputation.
Court Grants Injunction Against Further Defamation
The case, filed under suit number FCT/HC/GWD/CV/39/2025 and motion number FCT/HC/NY/M/1371/2025, sought an injunction to prevent VDM from making further posts or comments about her on social media.
Delivering the ex-parte ruling, Justice Aliyu Shafa granted Chinwo’s request, barring VeryDarkMan and his associates from making any further statements regarding her.
The court order states:
“The defendant/respondent (VDM) is hereby restrained, either by himself, his servants, privies, cohorts, representatives, or any person deriving authority from the defendant, from further posting, publishing, sharing, circulating, disseminating, or broadcasting through any social media platform or any electronic means any information, statement, or comment whatsoever in respect of or against the claimant/applicant, or on any issue relating to the subject matter of this suit, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.”
The court has set March 25, 2025, for the hearing of the case.
Implications for Social Media Commentary and Defamation Laws
This ruling highlights the increasing role of Nigerian courts in addressing defamation, cyberbullying, and social media accountability. Over the years, legal actions against social media influencers, bloggers, and commentators have increased, reinforcing the need for responsible digital engagement.
The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for online defamation lawsuits, particularly concerning the boundaries of free speech and the legal consequences of social media statements.
As the case proceeds, legal analysts will be watching closely to see how the court balances freedom of expression with the protection of individual reputations.
