A Delta State High Court sitting in Bomadi has awarded N30 million in damages against the International Centre for Investigative Reporting (ICIR) and one of its reporters, Isaac Markson, over a publication the court found to be false, malicious and defamatory against a former Director-General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Dr. Patrick Ziakede Akpobolokemi.
The judgment, delivered by Justice S.O. Adolor also ordered the defendants to retract the publication and issue a public apology in three national newspapers as well as on the ICIR website, while restraining them from making further defamatory statements against the claimant.
Akpobolokemi approached the court following the publication of an article titled “The Hidden Truth That Led to Killing of 17 Soldiers in Okuama Community,” which was published on April 13, 2024.
The report linked him to the deployment of soldiers to Okuama community in Delta State and suggested that he used his influence to skew military intervention in favour of his community, Okoloba.
The publication further implied that his alleged role contributed to the tragic killing of 17 soldiers in the community.
Aggrieved by what he described as a baseless and damaging report, Akpobolokemi insisted that the allegations were entirely false and portrayed him as complicit in a national tragedy, thereby gravely injuring his reputation.
He maintained that he was neither arrested, investigated nor prosecuted in connection with the Okuama incident and that the publication had no factual or judicial foundation.
In response, the defendants challenged the jurisdiction of the Delta State High Court, arguing that the alleged libel was an online publication and that the claimant failed to establish that it was published to third parties within Delta State.
They contended that the court lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
Justice Adolor, however, dismissed the objection, holding that online publications are deemed published in any place where they are accessed and read.
The court relied on the uncontroverted evidence of two witnesses who testified that they accessed, downloaded and read the publication in Bomadi, Delta State, and that their perception of the claimant was negatively affected by the content of the report.
The court held that this evidence sufficiently established publication within Delta State and conferred jurisdiction on the court.
On the substantive case, the court found that the publication directly referred to Akpobolokemi and portrayed him as an influential figure who allegedly orchestrated or influenced the deployment of soldiers to Okuama community, with grave implications linking him to the killing of 17 soldiers.
Justice Adolor held that the report went beyond fair reportage and crossed into defamatory imputation by presenting unproven allegations as facts.
The court noted that the defendants failed to establish the truth of the allegations contained in the publication.
It held that the claimant was never shown to have played any role in the incident and that the defendants could not rely on unnamed or untendered investigative reports to justify their claims.
According to the court, imputing criminal complicity to a person in the absence of any arrest, prosecution or conviction amounted to defamation.
The defendants’ reliance on the defences of justification, fair comment, qualified privilege and responsible journalism was rejected by the court.
Justice Adolor held that the defence of justification collapsed because the defendants failed to prove the truth of the allegations, while fair comment was unavailable since the underlying facts were not shown to be true.
The court further held that the defence of qualified privilege could not avail the defendants in the face of evidence pointing to malice, particularly their failure to verify serious allegations before publication.
The court also found that malice could be inferred from the circumstances of the case, stressing that responsible journalism demands a high degree of accuracy, especially when reporting on matters capable of destroying personal reputation.
It held that the defendants acted recklessly by publishing grave allegations without proper verification or evidential support.
While declining the claimant’s request for legal fees, on the ground that litigation costs cannot be transferred to the opposing party without strict proof, the court granted substantial reliefs in his favour.
In addition to the N30 million damages awarded jointly and severally against the defendants, the court ordered the immediate retraction of the defamatory publication and a public apology to be issued within seven days in three national newspapers and on the ICIR website.
It also granted a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from further publishing defamatory statements against the claimant, with post-judgment interest to accrue at the prevailing Central Bank of Nigeria rate until the judgment sum is fully liquidated.
Justice Adolor added that Akpobolokemi successfully proved his case on the balance of probabilities, while the defendants failed to justify or excuse their publication.
The court held that the law does not grant immunity to online publications and that journalists and media organisations remain bound by the rules of accuracy, fairness and responsibility in reporting.
The claimant was represented by Eric K. Omare, alongside Oke Joseph Enewovwa and Regina Aghogho Okulonye, while the defendants were absent when judgment was delivered on January 26, 2026.
