The four-year authorized battle between two Nigerian docs that after dominated Twitter timelines has ended with a decisive courtroom victory for Dr Bolanle Aseyan.
On August 18, Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal Excessive Court docket, Abuja, discharged and acquitted Dr Aseyan of all 4 counts of cyberbullying and cybercrime introduced towards her by fellow physician and well-liked Twitter influencer, Dr Olufunmilayo Ogunsanya, extensively referred to as #OurFavOnlineDoc.
Justice Lifu held that the prosecution didn’t show its case past an inexpensive doubt, discovering no credible proof that Dr Aseyan threatened, harassed, or intimidated the complainant on-line.
The case originated from a viral dispute in the course of the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020, after Dr Aseyan made public allegations towards Dr Ogunsanya throughout a go to to Leeds, UK. Dr Ogunsanya responded with a police petition accusing her of cyberbullying and defamation.
In his ruling, Justice Lifu famous that the police didn’t show malicious intent or hyperlink the alleged offending posts to Dr Aseyan’s verified social media accounts. “The prosecution didn’t discharge the burden of proof required by regulation,” the choose declared, dismissing all allegations and describing rumours that Dr Aseyan fled the UK as “baseless and vindictive.”
Past the acquittal, the case has sparked public debate about how regulation enforcement in Nigeria handles delicate on-line disputes. Stories cited by investigative platforms alleged that the dealing with of the matter by police concerned intimidation and coercion, elevating considerations about due course of.
Human rights observers have criticised the way in which the case was pursued, noting that Aseyan’s statements had been allegedly taken beneath duress with out the good thing about full authorized illustration.
Civil defamation fits filed by Dr Ogunsanya within the UK and Nigeria have additionally been struck out, successfully bringing to a detailed some of the extensively debated on-line controversies of the pandemic period.
For Dr Aseyan, the decision represents not simply private vindication but in addition a name for pressing reform in how delicate disputes are dealt with by regulation enforcement companies in Nigeria.
In the meantime, in a separate software beneath the Basic Rights (Enforcement Process) Guidelines, 2009, filed earlier than the Federal Excessive Court docket, Lagos Judicial Division, Dr Aseyan is looking for enforcement of her elementary rights, alleging continued police harassment and repeated threats of arrest regardless of the conclusion of the sooner legal case.
In an affidavit supporting her swimsuit, she acknowledged that the police have continued to intimidate and threaten her, a state of affairs she says has induced her extreme emotional and psychological misery.
She named the Inspector Normal of Police, the Commissioner of Police, Lagos State, the Deputy Commissioner of Police in control of the State Legal Investigation Division (CID), Panti, CSP Margaret Ighodalo (Investigating Police Officer), and Dr Ogunsanya as respondents within the swimsuit.
In accordance with her affidavit, after returning to Nigeria from the UK, she was arrested and arraigned earlier than the Justice of the Peace’s Court docket, Ebute Metta, on allegations of “conduct more likely to trigger risk to life.”
“The 4th respondent and her colleagues tried to forcefully compel me to make a video denying my earlier allegations. Once I refused, I used to be arraigned earlier than the Justice of the Peace’s Court docket,” she acknowledged.
She defined that she diligently attended her trial till prosecutors withdrew the case, claiming a brand new cost had been filed on the Federal Excessive Court docket.
Though the Justice of the Peace’s Court docket matter was struck out, she alleged that the police had continued to threaten her with arrest over the identical matter. “The police beneath the first to fifth respondents have continued to harass, embarrass, and threaten to arrest and detain me on the identical allegation already pending earlier than the Federal Excessive Court docket,” she mentioned.
Aseyan informed the courtroom that the fixed harassment had made it troublesome for her to concentrate on her work or dwell peacefully. She urged the courtroom to intervene and cease what she described as an illegal try and intimidate her into silence.
