By Samuel Marshall
In Nigeria today, the courtroom has become an unexpected extension of the political battlefield. From television studios to social media platforms, words spoken in the heat of political discourse are increasingly finding their way into defamation suits and criminal complaints — with far-reaching implications for journalism and press freedom in the country.
Over the past year, there has been a remarkable surge in lawsuits tied to media interviews, public commentary, and social media exchanges involving politicians and journalists. Legal practitioners describe the trend as “a new frontier of political contestation,” where image management and reputation repair have become as vital as electoral strategy.
The Cole–Wike Confrontation
A recent example that has set tongues wagging is the brewing legal storm between a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Rivers State, Tonye Cole, and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike.
Cole, a former gubernatorial candidate, has demanded ₦20 billion in compensation and a public apology from Channels Television, following remarks made by Wike during a live appearance on the station’s popular political programme, Politics Today.
In the interview, Wike reportedly described Cole as a “thief,” alleging he facilitated the sale of Rivers State’s gas assets valued at over $300 million. Cole’s legal team insists the statement was false, malicious, and gravely injurious to his reputation. A demand letter sent to Channels Television and the FCT Minister gave a 14-day ultimatum for retraction and apology — or face full litigation.
Observers say this is not the first time the two men have clashed. Their rivalry dates back to the fierce 2023 governorship campaign in Rivers State, and their current legal confrontation underscores how political tensions are increasingly spilling over into the media space.
A Growing List of Defamation Battles
The Cole-Wike episode is far from isolated. Just months earlier, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan was dragged before a Federal High Court by the Federal Government on three counts of criminal defamation. The charges stemmed from televised and phone statements in which she accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello of plotting to assassinate her.
Though the court later granted her bail to the tune of ₦50 million, civil rights groups, including SERAP, condemned the charges as an assault on free speech. The senator has since filed counter-petitions against Akpabio and socialite Sandra Duru, alleging conspiracy, cyber-stalking, and a smear campaign designed to damage her reputation.
In a related twist, a journalist, Maazi Obinna Oparaku Akuwudike, recently claimed he was paid ₦2.5 million by Sandra Duru to publish defamatory materials against Senator Akpoti. His subsequent arrest reignited debates over the vulnerability of journalists caught between power, money, and truth.
Similarly, human rights lawyer and activist Dele Farotimi faced arrest in December 2024 over alleged cyberbullying and defamation linked to his critique of Nigeria’s justice system. The incident drew national outrage and renewed calls for the repeal of colonial-era defamation laws that many believe are now being weaponised against dissent.
A Complex Media Environment
The sudden rise in litigation over political speech has created a tense atmosphere within Nigeria’s media industry. Many journalists privately admit that they now exercise greater caution in their reporting — sometimes avoiding politically charged subjects altogether.
Legal experts argue that while politicians have the right to protect their reputations, frequent resort to litigation could chill public discourse.
“We’re seeing defamation suits used not just as a shield, but as a sword,” notes media law analyst Barrister Fred Aigbe. “It’s becoming a tool for silencing critical voices rathe
[10:03 AM, 11/3/2025] Mr marshall: “We’re seeing defamation suits used not just as a shield, but as a sword,” notes media law analyst Barrister Fred Aigbe. “It’s becoming a tool for silencing critical voices rather than correcting falsehood.”
For media houses, the risks are no longer limited to the reporter or presenter. Entire organisations now face legal exposure for live broadcasts, opinion columns, or unscripted comments made by guests on air. The Channels Television demand notice from Tonye Cole is a stark reminder that editorial oversight now carries legal weight.
Press Freedom or Legal Reckoning?
While some see this development as a dangerous encroachment on press freedom, others argue it signals a maturing democracy in which public figures increasingly rely on legal institutions rather than street rhetoric to defend their image.
However, critics warn that the balance is dangerously tipping toward intimidation.***
