Background
The founder of Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti (ABUAD), Aare Afe Babalola, has addressed allegations by human rights activist Dele Farotimi, who claimed in a book that Babalola corrupted Nigeria’s judiciary system. Speaking through his legal representative, Owoseni Ajayi, Babalola maintained that Farotimi would be freed if he substantiates his claims.
“Justice is not exclusive to anyone. If Mr. Dele Farotimi can prove his assertions are true, he will be free. Until then, free speech does not extend to defaming another’s reputation,” said Ajayi.
Arrest and Arraignment
Farotimi was arrested in Lagos on charges of criminal libel after a petition was filed against him. He was arraigned before Magistrate Abayomi Adeosun in Ekiti, where he pleaded not guilty to 16 counts of defamation. The magistrate ordered his remand in custody until the next hearing, scheduled for December 10, 2024.
Farotimi, who has been vocal about threats to silence him, took to social media before his arrest to claim intimidation. He described the petition against him as “baseless” and maintained his innocence.
Legal and Public Reactions
The case has sparked widespread debates, with the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) condemning Farotimi’s arrest. NBA President Afam Osigwe criticized the raid on Farotimi’s law firm, labeling it a violation of his constitutional rights.
“We demand the immediate release of Mr. Dele Farotimi. His arrest lacks legal merit, and those responsible for the raid on his law firm must be held accountable,” Osigwe stated.
The incident has raised questions about free speech, the rule of law, and the boundaries of accountability in Nigeria.
READ ALSO: JUST IN: Afe Babalola Breaks Silence on Farotimi’s Detention
A Call for Truth
Babalola’s camp urged Nigerians to prioritize verifying facts over taking sides, emphasizing the importance of seeking justice without prejudice. “All facts are verifiable,” Ajayi added, reiterating the founder’s stance on truth and justice.
As the case unfolds, the nation remains divided over the legal and ethical implications of the ongoing defamation trial.
