From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Maitama, Abuja on Tuesday, dismissed a N5 billion defamation suit by Raymond Dokpesi against the Minister of Information, Lai Mohammed and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN).
Dokpesi had, in the N5 billion libel suit, claimed that the Minister’s alleged inclusion of his name among supposed looters of the nation’s treasury has defamed him and damaged his reputation.
He accordingly, demanded N5billion damages, public apology to the published in five national dailies, among other reliefs.
However, in his judgment on Tuesday, Justice Olukayode Adeniyi held that Dokpesi failed to establish his claim that his was indeed defamed by the minister by the inclusion of his name in a list of looters at a press conference on March 30, 2018, by the minister.
Besides, Justice Adeniyi, faulted the evidence led by Dokpesi through the eight witnesses he called and held that the claimant failed to prove the publication of the alleged defamatory statement.
The Judge specifically noted that the evidence of the eight witnesses were similar, giving the impression that they were tutored and that their statements were made before hand through the same mechanical means.
He described their evidence before the court as “hear one, hear all,” as they were materially the same.
The court further noted that whereas the claimant pleaded libel, his witnesses gave evidence of slander by claiming to have heard of the alleged defamatory publication on Channels Television.
It further found that the witnesses called by Dokpesi, who claimed to have watched the press conference on Channels TV, did not give evidence in respect of the exact statement made by Mohammed, which they claimed defamed the claimant.
Upon examination, I do not fine the claimant’s witnesses’ evidence under cross-examination as helpful in establishing publication.
At best, the totality of their testimony, stating that they heard the first defendant calling the claimant a looter, amounted to speculation as they failed to give evidence as to th exact words allegedly spoken by the first defendant.
“I must hold that the evidence of CW1 to CW8 fell abysmally short of the acceptable evidence of publication of the alleged slander.
“I must quickly add that whatever opinion the claimant’s witnesses have, with respect to the alleged defamatory statement, in terms of how they received it or what interpretation they gave to it, becomes irrelevant, they having failed to give a clear and credible evidence of the said statement,” he said.
In dismissing the suit, Justice Adeniyi further added that the claimant’s failure to prove that the alleged defamatory statement was published to the witnesses fatally paralysed his case.