14th November, 2012
Leading Nigerian lawyers have called for a review of the provisions in the nation’s Evidence Act to accommodate internet-based defamation of individuals to make it easier for victims to claim damages.
This position was canvassed Tuesday in Lagos, Southwest Nigeria, at a one-day seminar on the law of defamation organised by G.M. Ibru & Co. at Sheraton Lagos Hotel, Ikeja.
Among the papers presented by eminent lawyers and renowned scholars, that of Prof. Taiwo Osipitan (SAN) dwelt specifically on the Evidence Act. It was aptly titled: Evidence in the Air: Limits of the Evidence Act in Proving Defamation Communication.
He said because internet defamation is not in permanent form, it is difficult to prove it, especially as publication through the internet may be anonymous, adding that “it may be impossible to trace the originator of defamatory materials. This has the potential of relaxing responsibility and accountability.”
According to him, since evidence is at the heart of law, if you don’t have it at your finger tips, a victim is likely to lose his case.
Prof. Osipitan added: “The most challenging aspect of proving defamation on social networking sites is the adaptation of the Law of Evidence to deal efficiently with the introduction of modern technology.
“Where many copies of the same letters or documents are printed at the same or different times, which of the copies constitutes primary or secondary evidence?”
It is in view of these challenges that other lawyers called for a review of the Evidence Act to deal with present challenges posed by internet defamation.
In his view, one of the discussants, B.I.E. Nwofor (SAN) wants the Evidence Act to be amended not only by the National Assembly but also with inputs by eminent lawyers.
He said last year’s token amendment was not far-reaching enough because experts were not involved in the process, adding that there is conflict between sections 84 and 258 of the Act.
In his contribution, Dele Awokoya, another discussant, said there are limitations in the Evidence Act while proving defamation on the internet.
He suggested that the Nigerian Communications Commission, NCC, should hold internet service providers liable for internet-based defamation, adding that provisions in the Evidence Act are not adequate to cover this new form of defamation.
John Akintayo, also a discussant, said: “Our law on defamation should be wider. The use of pseudo names on the internet makes it difficult to sue for defamation.”
Tunde Ogala, in his submission, said: “Laws in Nigeria do not exist concerning internet defamation. How do we establish publication? The feeble attempt to tackle internet publication is only on cyber security.
“It is even difficult to quantify the extent of damage to reputation, etc. We need to look at our laws. Punishment for internet-based defamation is relative. You can delete and deny. “Before courts can deal with issues of internet-based defamation, the laws have to be reviewed in Nigeria and globally. We must amend our Evidence Act.”
Others who presented papers were Tayo Oyetibo (SAN) whose paper dwelt on: Navigating Defamation: How the Mass Media Can Avoid Pitfalls; and Prof. Eunice Uzodike, whose paper was titled: “The Law of Defamation in Nigeria As It Is Today”. Another paper titled: Punishin Defamation: Yaradstick For Awarding Damages In An ICT-Driven World, was presented Oluwemimo Ogunde (SAN), the Ogun State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice. Mr. Femi Falana (SAN) and Prof. Ralph Akinfeleye were among the discussants at the event which was well attended by lawyers, senior editors and media practitioners.
—David Odey