Activist and social media influencer Martins Otse, widely known as VeryDarkMan, has remained unyielding in the face of a defamation lawsuit brought against him by prominent human rights lawyer Femi Falana and his son, popular musician and activist, Falz. The legal action follows allegations that Otse shared unverified information defaming the Falana family.
VeryDarkMan announced his arrival in Lagos with his legal representative, Deji Adeyanju, in an Instagram post earlier today, ahead of the court hearing scheduled for 9:00 a.m. at Ikeja High Court. The lawsuit stems from Otse’s decision to share an audio recording in which crossdresser Bobrisky allegedly accused Femi Falana and Falz of offering assistance during her six-month sentence for naira abuse. According to the recording, they reportedly promised to secure a presidential pardon for ₦10 million.
However, Bobrisky has publicly discredited the recording, asserting that it is false and warning Otse of potential legal consequences for defamation. The Falana family also demanded a retraction and public apology from VeryDarkMan, cautioning that legal proceedings would follow if he did not comply.
In response, Otse has refused to retract his statements, asserting that his motivations were rooted in a desire to expose alleged corruption rather than to tarnish reputations. In a recent video post, he stated, “They (Falana and Falz) said I defamed them, but for me, it’s corruption I exposed. I see things that don’t make sense, like someone going to prison and not serving their jail term or the EFCC, which is supposed to catch people involved in corruption, collecting money.”
Otse’s remarks reflect his broader criticism of the judicial and political system, where he claimed that individuals can bypass due process through backdoor dealings. He expressed disappointment that the Falana family chose to pursue legal action instead of engaging with the issues he raised, noting that they took offence to his decision not to inform them before releasing the content.
As the court hearing unfolds, the case has garnered significant public attention, with many closely following the developments. The controversy underscores the tension between freedom of expression and accountability, raising questions about the limits of activism in the digital age and the responsibilities of influencers in handling sensitive information.
Consequently, the Ikeja High Court proceedings are expected to address the validity of the claims and determine whether Otse’s actions constitute defamation or whether they fall under the umbrella of exposing potential corruption.
