Contrary to assertions by some so-called experts who have been prattling all week that Dele Farotimi wrote what he could not logically substantiate in his book Nigeria and its Criminal Justice System, this was a pre-meditated confrontation. Having depleted the legal means to get justice, he wrote to re-litigate the case in the court of public opinion. He seems calculatedly driven by the Yoruba proverb that says no one dies at the same spot they uttered blasphemy. In the time between your speaking and being punished, much can happen to change social dynamics. From the potpourri of events in the past week, Farotimi got what he wanted. One cannot say the same for Afe Babalola who, by now, would have realised that giving a traducer what they want is not the most prudent battle move. My reading is that Farotimi knew Babalola’s peculiar weakness and worked it to advantage. I will get to that momentarily.
The blowback from this case is another instance that hopefully teaches our elites to rein in their tendency to exploit the warped Nigerian justice system that allows criminal defamation as a legal recourse. Criminal defamation might be legal, but it is unjust. It is a law that exists to regulate the differentials of power and access, one of the many ways rich people further privatise public resources. Since lawmakers are too compromised to expunge the law and law enforcers incapable of the reflexivity that will enlighten them on the stupidity of using state resources to fight an individual over another’s integrity, the best we can do for now is pressure the entitled “big man” not to take that path. In a criminal case, the prosecutor investigates to convict. The Nigerian police, perennially short of resources, spares no expense when sent to prosecute criminal defamation on behalf of another narcissist. Why should the state do that on behalf of an ordinary individual? Babalola, especially, is a man of ample resources, who can afford to fight for his reputation on his own dime.
So, on Friday, Babalola’s legal team held a press conference in Ado Ekiti. Among several things, the lead lawyer Owoseni Ajayi said was: “Those pushing Farotimi are not his friends. By the time they led him to the dungeon, he would realise they were deceiving him. Let me advise his family members to apologise to Aare. Aare Babalola is a builder, not interested in destroying Farotimi.” I was intrigued by what he said it takes for them to call off the police hounds. If someone injured your reputation, and that reputation is truly worth the price you placed on it, why would you not be interested in watching them destroyed? Why would Ajayi, so sure of their victory that he boldly asserted that the only possible conclusion to the case is the dungeon, want to settle for the cheap spectacle of Farotimi’s family members with their clasped hands rolling on the floor and begging?
What sealed the picture for me was an article by Kenneth Ikonne where he, like Ajayi, also urged Farotimi to go “beg” Babalola. According to Ikonne, he had won a preliminary objection against Babalola’s suit—which a lawyer is supposed to do, right? —but he was so intimidated by his own victory against the legal giant that he had to go beg Babalola. While Ikonne’s adulating article drips with flattery, it also unwittingly reveals a kabiyesi-complex. It is an attitude that revels in watching other humans’ heads perpetually bowed in servile reverence so they can repay your self-denigration with overwhelming niceness. Babalola seems like a man who likes to be liked, an attitude is consistently weakening because you must always play nice. Please note that there is a vast difference between being nice because you are a decent human and niceness as manipulation, a means to seduce others into becoming your subject. People of the latter category will take you to the top of the pinnacle, show you the extent of their power and glory, and nicely offer you a portion if only you would bend obsequious knees before them. If you refuse, they will then kick your calves until you fall on your face.
Babalola is so used to a world where junior lawyers who defeat him in court still come to his Ado Ekiti palace to prostrate before him that Farotimi’s boldness to confront him must have been jarring. He resorted to his standard weapons of warfare, but as he must have also found out in the past week, the battle terrain has changed. Even if he wins the case, what will be the social value of a reputation held up by the courts? If Farotimi begs him as his lawyer and others have enjoined, what is done cannot be undone.
However, this goes down, I commend Farotimi’s boldness. We all agree that the Nigerian judiciary is rotten, but the logic of producing rational evidence has made it virtually impossible to progress beyond merely abstract observations. Until we begin to mention names and point accusing fingers at specific people, the issues will remain intractable. Statistically, Nigerian judges and magistrates are the highest receivers of bribes in 2023, beating even the Customs/Immigration! This is according to the NBS. Those who facilitated these transactions are not ghosts. We have all been witnesses to the several instances where retiring judges have severely deplored the rot in the judiciary. It is amusing to see some people pretending Farotimi revealed what they did not already know.
Our society maintains an overly reverential attitude toward people who have money and power, and are elderly. When a person combines all three, we are virtually cowed before their almighty presence. Otherwise, why can we not ask, if defamation is an offence that supposedly lessens someone’s reputational worth, what exactly would constitute it in the case of persons who have practised law in morally decrepit and with progressively weakened institutions like Nigeria for 60-plus years? Which of the atrocities that presently bedevils the country does not have the hands of the so-called learned class in it? This is not to disparage the legal profession or caricature lawyers, but we cannot talk about what is wrong with Nigeria today without the role lawyers have played in vandalising the temple of justice. From the so-called “legal luminaries” who—through endless frivolous election petitions—rendered democracy incoherent to the ones with the “SAN” appendage to their names who fraternise with politicians, they remade the country in their amoral image.
We were all here when a partner in the firm of a high-profile lawyer solicited the client of another, saying their principal’s political influence would “significantly switch things in favour” of the prospective client. While that woman was disowned and eventually debarred, it was a moment of self-revelation as to how the justice system operates. Big names in the legal system do not necessarily correspond with a deep knowledge of the law. It just means they know which judge to buy and which string to pull. We witnessed a lawmaker publicly admitting that his judge’s wife helped his colleagues win their various cases. In a serious country, every case that a woman adjudicated would have been recalled and scrutinised, but this is Nigeria. Nothing ever happens here. This is the utterly compromised ecosystem in which Babalola has practised law and thrived to the point he built a magnificent university. He was also a lawyer and confidant to former President Olusegun Obasanjo, whose administration reputation was thoroughly corrupt. Nobody, not even the staunchest of his defenders, has said of Farotimi’s allegations that “it cannot possibly be true”. What they all say is, “It cannot be proven,” and that is telling enough.
Given the contradictions of his profession, Babalola should have been circumspect enough to not jump into a public contest over his reputation. He seems to me like a man who has invested in being nice just so that he would not be remembered as a villain in Nigeria’s story. Now he is no longer the man with the carefully curated legacy who set out to redeem his image but the one who proved his critic right.
Punch
