Understanding Defamation: Civil and Criminal Perspectives – By Abejide B. Olusegun

Defamation, at its core, is a wrongful act of injuring someone’s reputation through false or malicious statements, whether written (libel) or spoken (slander).

It is crucial to understand the distinctions between civil and criminal defamation, as the consequences and implications of each differ significantly. These distinctions influence the handling of defamation cases by individuals, societies, and legal systems, guaranteeing justice while safeguarding the fundamental rights of expression and reputation.

Civil vs. Criminal Defamation

Civil defamation focuses on providing remedies to the victim through compensatory or punitive damages. The defamed individual brings a lawsuit against the defamer, seeking redress for the harm done to their reputation.

The burden of proof lies on the plaintiff to demonstrate that the defamatory statements were false, damaging, and made with malice or negligence.

When the aggrieved party seeks monetary compensation or a public apology to restore their reputation, they often pursue civil cases.

Criminal defamation, on the other hand, involves treating defamation as a public wrong. Here, the state prosecutes the defendant, with penalties ranging from fines to imprisonment, depending on the severity of the offense and its impact.

Criminal defamation emphasizes deterrence, sending a clear message that slander or libel carries severe consequences. When defamation is egregious and has widespread or devastating effects, such as inciting violence, hatred, or public unrest, people typically choose this route.

Contextualizing Defamation
in Nigeria

Misinformation and ignorance often muddy the debate in Nigeria about defamation laws, particularly their criminal aspects.

What an Innuendo: a startling number of self-proclaimed “activists” and supposed legal advocates propagate the misconception that defamation is not a crime!

This narrative, unfortunately, finds traction among those who lack a nuanced understanding of legal principles or the duality of defamation as both a civil wrong and a criminal offense. Contrary to these assertions, however, defamation remains actionable as both a civil and a criminal matter under Nigerian law, enshrined in statutes and judicial precedents).

Section 373 of Nigeria’s Criminal Code Act provides the framework for prosecuting criminal defamation, underscoring its significance in maintaining societal order and protecting individual reputations.

The “Theory of Effect” in
Defamation Jurisprudence

A crucial yet often overlooked legal principle in defamation cases is the “theory of effect.” This doctrine asserts that the jurisdiction to prosecute or address defamation extends beyond its origin to the location where the defamatory material generates its impact.

For instance, if an individual, Dele, publishes a book in Lagos containing defamatory statements about another person, the book’s reach transcends Lagos. Its readership could extend to Ekiti, Anambra, Yola, Edo, or even international audiences. The defamatory statements cause reputational damage not only in Lagos but also wherever the victim lives, works, or has personal or professional ties.

Take the hypothetical scenario involving Mr. Farotimi and Chief Afe Babalola, a prominent figure based in Ado Ekiti. If defamatory material targeting Chief Afe Babalola originates in Lagos but affects his reputation, businesses, and personal relationships in Ekiti, the legal right to address the matter in Ekiti is unequivocal. The “theory of effect” upholds the principle of establishing jurisdiction when the defamatory act yields tangible consequences.

Lessons in Accountability:
Balancing Rights and
Responsibilities

Freedom of expression, a cornerstone of democracy, must coexist with the responsibility to avoid recklessly damaging others’ reputations. In a time when social media amplifies voices, it is often difficult to distinguish between constructive critique and defamatory speech.

Many who advocate the unrestricted exercise of free speech conveniently ignore its corollary — the right of others to defend their dignity and reputation.

When held accountable for their actions, some defendants frequently adopt a victim narrative. They trumpet their right to free speech while conveniently overlooking the rights of those they harm. This behavior underscores the need for legal frameworks that ensure justice while curbing abuse.

The case of Chief Afe Babalola serves as a cautionary tale for those who assume they can defame others with impunity. The notion that a defendant should be immune to prosecution outside the location of their act reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of legal principles.

Just as defamatory materials can damage a reputation globally, so too can its accountability transcend borders!

The Broader Implications of
Defamation Law

Addressing defamation is not merely about safeguarding individual reputations; it’s about maintaining societal harmony and upholding justice. Allowing unchecked defamatory acts foster a culture of recklessness, where falsehoods become weapons to undermine trust and destroy lives!

Defamation laws serve as a bulwark against such chaos, providing mechanisms to redress harm while deterring future violations.

For Nigeria, strengthening the understanding and enforcement of defamation laws is essential. Public education campaigns, coupled with judicial clarity, can dismantle the myths surrounding defamation and empower individuals to pursue justice responsibly.

Advocacy groups and legal professionals must bridge the gap between theoretical rights and practical responsibilities, ensuring that free speech enriches society rather than erodes its foundations.

Conclusion: A Call for
Responsibility and Respect

Defamation is a potent issue, with consequences that extend far beyond the individuals involved.

Whether addressed as a civil wrong or a criminal offense, it underscores the importance of balancing freedom of expression with accountability. The principles of law are clear: no one has the right to tarnish another’s reputation without consequences!

Upholding both the spirit and the letter of defamation laws is imperative in a society striving for fairness and equity. Those who engage in defamation must recognize that their actions have ripple effects, touching lives and reputations far beyond their immediate sphere.

Choosing to defame someone entails taking a risk of accountability, not only in the location of the act but also in the aftermath.

As such, let this serve as a reminder: free speech is a right, but with every right comes responsibility.

Defamation is recklessness, and those who work it must be prepared to face the consequences when the aggrieved seek justice!

In a world where words have power, let us wield them with care, respect, and an unwavering commitment to truth.

–Abejide PhD is a legal practitioner and public affairs analyst.