The Legal Positions and Ignorance of Some Nigerians on Defaming Person’s Personality Through Media -By Abdulganiyu Azeez

I do feel uncomfortable whenever I see people causing damage to another person’s personality. Does this habit continue? If no then, how can we eradicate such a habit from being continued? However, it’s unarguable that no law is enacted without cause. It’s either to deter bad behaviors or to reform society from the cause of such bad behaviors or provide equitable rights to the citizens of such a country.

Besides, many media users in Nigeria are ignorant of the consequences of defaming a person’s personality as of laws or as of facts. Furthermore, in a common sense everyone knows that when one buys a television, phone or any electric appliances that it’s going to have a manual which will guide you through. However, it’s the same rules that apply to media usages. No one can use the media anyhow. Although the essence of media is in relation to the freedom of expression. And this freedom of expression is limited by legal reasons.

There’s punishment attached to defamation in every nation in the world but the punishment is of not equal because of one or two reasons. This brief article is going to enlighten us on the legal position as to defamation of character in Nigeria and outside Nigeria as well as decided cases.

More so, generally Nigeria is a multilingual nation, dynamic in culture, and religious differences. Because of this Nigeria is stable on one law. That’s we’re having two laws which are criminal law for Southern Nigeria while Penal Code for Northern Nigeria. Therefore, I’m going write this article on two sides.

According to section 373 of the Criminal Code Nigeria, Defamatory matter is a matter likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or likely to damage any person in his profession or trade by any injury to his reputation.

Such matter may be expressed in spoken words or in any audible sounds, or in words legibly marked on any substance whatever, or by any sign or object signifying such matter otherwise than by words, and may be expressed either directly or by insinuation or irony. It is immaterial whether at the time of the publication of the defamatory matter, the person concerning whom such matter is published is living or dead:
Provided that no prosecution for the publication of defamatory matter concerning a dead person shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney‐General of the Federation.

(1) For the purposes of this Code, the publication of defamatory matter is‐(a) in the case of spoken words or audible sounds, the speaking of such words or the making of such sounds in the hearing of the person defamed or any other person;
(b) in other cases, the exhibiting of it in public, or causing it to be read or seen, or showing or delivering it, or causing it to be shown or delivered, with intent that it may be read or seen by the person defamed or by any other person.
(2) Sounds where recorded shall, if defamatory, be deemed to be published if reproduced in any place to the hearing of persons other than the person causing it to be reproduced.
(3) In this section‐
“recorded” means sounds collected or stored by means of tape, disc, cylinder or other means whatsoever, where the sounds are capable of being reproduced or are intended for reproduction by electrical or mechanical means at any time or from time to time thereafter, and includes the matrix, and cognate expressions shall have the like meaning;
“sound” includes speech and mere noise.

What is defamation under the penal code in Nigeria?
Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, any person who publishes any defamatory matter, is guilty of a misdemeanor and is liable to imprisonment for one year; and any person who publishes any defamatory matter knowing it to be false, is liable to imprisonment for two years

ACT THAT LEAD TO DEFAMATION
1. that there is the publication of the material complained of by the defendant;
2. That the publication refers to no other person but the plaintiff conclusively
3. That the publication is defamatory of the plaintiff

TYPES OF DEFAMATORY STATEMENT
The terms libel, slander, and defamation are frequently confused with each other. They are all similar in that they all fall into the same general area of law that concerns false statements which harm a person’s reputation. This general area of law is called defamation law. Libel and slander are types of defamatory statements.
1. Libel is a defamatory statement that is written.
2. Slander is a defamatory statement that is oral.

DECIDED CASES ON DEFAMATION
Vardy v. Rooney [2022] EWHC 2017 (QB)The case was one of the most high-profile libel cases in recent years, concerning the alleged leaking of posts from Ms Rooney’s private Instagram account to the Sun by Ms Vardy, via her agent Ms Caroline Watt. The resulting post on social media regarding Ms Vardy’s involvement in the leaks by Ms Rooney, were the subject of the libel claim.

Ultimately the claim of libel against the defendant, Coleen Rooney, was dismissed due to the defense of truth being established. Notably, “the information disclosed was not deeply confidential, and it can fairly be described as trivial, but it does not need to be confidential or important to meet the sting of the libel.” [287]

In handing down judgment Mrs Justice Steyn considered that “Ms Vardy knew of and condone this behavior, actively engaging in it by directing Ms Watt to the Private Instagram Account, sending her screenshots of Ms Rooney’s posts, drawing attention to items of potential interest to the press, and answering additional queries raised by the press via Ms Watt” [285].

Banks v Cadwalladr [2022] EWHC 1417 (QB)The primary issues at trial were whether the threshold of serious harm under s.1 Defamation Act 2013 was met by the statements and whether the defendant has established the defence of public interest pursuant to s.4 Defamation Act 2013. The defence of public interest succeeded only in part, with allegations of serious harm in relation to the tweet being rejected:

“The claimant’s case on this issue is essentially dependent on drawing an inference of serious harm from the combination of the gravity of the imputation and the extent of publication. While I have been persuaded, on balance, to draw such an inference in relation to the TED Talk, in my judgment, the claimant has not established that the Tweet caused (or is likely to cause) serious harm to Mr Banks’s reputation. Accordingly, I dismiss the claim in respect of the Tweet on the grounds that the condition in s.1 of the 2013 Act is not met. [94]”