Oyo State High Court, sitting in Ibadan has adjourned for judgement a N5 billion defamatory suit instituted by the Aareonakakanfo of Yorubaland, Chief Gani Adams against the Yoruba nation activist, Chief Sunday Adeyemo, popularly known as Igboho to July 3, 2025 for judgment.
The suit marked M/1006/2024 is before Justice O.T Ademola-Salami sitting at High Court 15, Iyaganku, Ibadan.
Adams, who is also the National Coordinator of the Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC) and plaintiff filed for the enforcement of his fundamental rights, alleging that Igboho by his actions, injured him in his capacity as the Aare Ona Kakanfo of Yorubaland and demanded N5 billion as damages.
He alleged that the defendant (Igboho) recorded a telephone conversation of him with another person without his consent to get defamatory content, saying the action breached his right to privacy pursuant to Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
Adams was seeking among other reliefs a declaration that “It is unlawful, illegal and unconstitutional for anyone to surreptitiously record the private telephone conversation between other persons without the consent and authority of the parties to the conversation.
“A declaration that it is unlawful, illegal and unconstitutional for the respondent to covertly record and publicly release or publish the private telephone conversation between the applicant and another person, without the consent and authority of the applicant.”
But when the case came up on Wednesday, counsel for Adams, Sikiru Akinrele argued his application to enforce the fundamental right of his client while he urged the court to grant all his reliefs.
However, counsel for Igboho, Mr Junaid Sanusi, on the other hand informed the court that he had opposed the application and subsequently filed counter affidavit and a written address in support of his counter affidavit both of which were consequently adopted.
He urged the court after to dismiss the case of the applicant, contending that “the applicant did not personally depose to the affidavit in support of his application and the law is that if a third party deposes, he must state the reason why the applicant cannot personally depose to the affidavit in support of his claims.
Sanusi further argued that the applicant has not proven the allegation of phone tapping which will enable him the entitlement for reliefs sought, just as he urged to refuse the application and award cost in favour of his client.
The case was later adjourned to July 3, 2025 for judgment.
TRIBUNE
Comment here
You must be logged in to post a comment.