VeryDarkMan must answer for his reckless desecration of the Armed Forces — by Peter Aro

The reported declaration by Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan, that “every military man is corrupt” is outrageous, preposterous and utterly indefensible. If those were indeed his words and intended meaning, then he crossed the boundary between legitimate criticism and reckless defamation. This was not activism. It was not courage. It was not accountability. It was a sweeping and malicious assault on the character of every serving and retired member of the Armed Forces of Nigeria. Such an insult must not be allowed to slide.

Having friends or acquaintances in the Armed Forces does not confer upon VeryDarkMan the authority to desecrate the institution. Friendship with a few military personnel is neither a licence to condemn all service members nor a defence against responsibility for an outrageous generalisation. Nobody earns the right to drag the honour of the Armed Forces through the mud merely because he knows some people in uniform. Personal familiarity does not excuse institutional defamation.

The Armed Forces of Nigeria contain thousands of upright, disciplined and patriotic men and women. Many have served for decades without stealing one naira, betraying their oath or staining their uniforms. Some are presently confronting terrorists, insurgents, bandits, kidnappers, oil thieves and other violent criminals across the country. Others have suffered life-changing injuries in service. Many have died defending a nation whose citizens may never know their names.

To brand every one of these people corrupt is a disgraceful desecration of their sacrifices. It spits on the graves of fallen heroes. It insults the wounded. It humiliates veterans who surrendered the best years of their lives to Nigeria. It torments families that received folded national flags instead of the return of their loved ones. It is particularly offensive coming from a young man who is not old enough to lecture many retired officers on integrity, sacrifice or patriotism.

The Nigerian Armed Forces are not a private organisation that can be casually dismissed as the property of a few individuals. Section 217(1) of the 1999 Constitution expressly establishes the Armed Forces of the Federation, consisting of the Army, Navy and Air Force. Section 217(2) assigns them the enormous responsibilities of defending Nigeria from external aggression, maintaining the country’s territorial integrity and securing its borders.

Even more significantly, Section 217(3) requires the composition of the officer corps and other ranks to reflect the federal character of Nigeria. Section 219 reinforces that constitutional requirement. The Armed Forces therefore embody the federation: their personnel come from Nigeria’s states, ethnic groups, religions and communities. They are sons and daughters of the entire country. To condemn every military person as corrupt is to hurl an indiscriminate accusation at Nigerians drawn from every corner of the federation.

No provision of the Constitution places the military above criticism, so corruption in military, misconduct, abuse of authority and human-rights violations must be exposed and punished wherever credible evidence exists. However, criticism must be directed at identifiable conduct and supported by facts. Nobody should be permitted to hide malice behind the convenient language of activism.
Section 39 of the Constitution protects freedom of expression, but that freedom is not a licence to manufacture allegations, destroy reputations or condemn thousands of innocent people without evidence. Freedom of speech is not freedom from responsibility. It is not freedom from legal consequences. Section 45 also recognises that rights may be subject to laws reasonably justifiable in a democratic society for purposes including public safety, public order and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

VeryDarkMan must therefore be compelled to account for his words through the law. Those with the proper legal standing should immediately instruct counsel, preserve the complete and unedited recording of the event and commence appropriate defamation proceedings if the evidence supports the reported statement. He should be made to enter the witness box and present the evidence upon which he branded every soldier, sailor and airman corrupt. Social-media popularity must not place anyone above the law.

A defamation suit would not amount to suppressing criticism. It would give VeryDarkMan a fair opportunity to prove his allegation before a competent court. If he possesses evidence that every member of the Armed Forces is corrupt, let him produce it. If he cannot, he should face the lawful consequences of making such a reckless and destructive accusation.

The final determination of liability belongs to the court, but this matter is far too serious to be dismissed as mere social-media drama. A public figure cannot stand before lawyers, policymakers and international observers, condemn an entire constitutional institution and then walk away as though nothing happened. A formal retraction and an unreserved public apology must be demanded. Where legally sustainable, damages should also be pursued to demonstrate that reckless allegations have consequences.

The Nigerian Bar Association must also explain how its Annual General Conference became a platform for such institutional vandalism. The NBA is not a street corner, beer parlour or unregulated social-media broadcast. It is the foremost professional association of Nigerian lawyers. A gathering of jurists, senior advocates, judges, policymakers and international guests should not permit the reputation of an entire national institution to be recklessly destroyed without an immediate demand for evidence.

Worse still, presenting an award to VeryDarkMan following such a controversy creates a terrible impression. Whatever the original purpose of the recognition, the timing risks being interpreted as applause for reckless speech. The NBA must release the complete recording of the proceedings, clarify exactly what was said and dissociate itself from every unsupported blanket accusation against the Armed Forces.

The Chief of Defence Staff and the Service Chiefs must not remain silent. Their responsibility is not limited to directing military operations. They also owe a duty of leadership to the young recruit standing guard in dangerous conditions, the wounded combatant receiving treatment, the officer serving with integrity and the retired veteran living quietly after decades of honourable service. These people deserve to know that their commanders will not watch helplessly while their names are dragged through the mud.

The military leadership should obtain the complete recording, demand a public retraction and apology, and consult legal counsel on the appropriate lawful response. The response must remain constitutional and professional: no threats, intimidation or arbitrary use of security agencies. The Armed Forces defend the Constitution and must therefore seek redress through the Constitution and the courts.

It has become necessary for serving and retired military personnel who publicly associate with VeryDarkMan to reconsider and distance themselves from him: not as an act of intimidation or personal persecution, but as a clear demonstration that loyalty to the institution cannot coexist with the public humiliation of everyone who wears or has worn its uniform. Continued public association risks creating the impression that such contempt has been tolerated, excused or even endorsed from within the ranks. Perhaps he became emboldened after repeatedly describing the police as corrupt without being compelled to substantiate such sweeping allegations or face meaningful legal consequences; having tested that boundary, he has now extended the same reckless generalisation to the entire Armed Forces. Personnel must therefore make it unmistakably clear that friendship, familiarity or social-media popularity cannot take precedence over institutional honour. Anyone who refuses to respect the sacrifices, dignity and integrity of the Armed Forces should not expect serving personnel to lend him their association, access or credibility.

VeryDarkMan must understand that popularity is not proof, noise is not courage, and recklessness is not patriotism. A large following does not transform a sweeping falsehood into truth. Knowing military personnel does not make him the custodian of the institution’s conscience, and having criticised wrongdoing in the past does not give him permanent immunity from accountability.

Criticise the Armed Forces when they fail. Expose any corrupt officer for whom credible evidence exists. Identify wrongdoing, name the offenders, present the facts and demand prosecution. But no individual—regardless of fame, influence or connections: should be allowed to condemn every serving and retired military person as corrupt without being required to prove it.

The honour of the Armed Forces was built over generations and paid for through service, injury, separation and sacrifice. It cannot be surrendered to a reckless sentence uttered for applause or social-media relevance. VeryDarkMan must produce his evidence, retract the accusation or defend it before a competent court. He must be held fully accountable under the law. This insult is intolerable. This desecration is unacceptable. It must not be excused, normalised or allowed to slide.

–Aro (mni) is a retired Brigadier General of the Nigerian Army