In a recent ruling by the Federal High Court in Lagos, a fundamental rights lawsuit initiated by social media personality Okuneye Idris Olanrewaju, widely known as Bobrisky, against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the National Assembly has been dismissed. Bobrisky sought N200 million in damages from the EFCC for “psychotic trauma” and an additional N1 billion from the National Assembly, claiming violation of his right to a fair hearing. Furthermore, he requested the court to prevent both the EFCC and the National Assembly from “harassing, detaining, or declaring him wanted.” The case has attracted significant attention due to the controversies surrounding Bobrisky’s public image and legal troubles.
The controversy intensified when social media influencer Martins Otse released an audio recording that implicated Bobrisky in a payment of N15 million to the EFCC to quash money laundering charges against him. Bobrisky vehemently denied the authenticity of the recording, suggesting it was fabricated, and threatened legal action against the individual responsible for its release. Despite his protests, he faced legal challenges from the EFCC, notably failing to attend a summoned meeting with the commission. The situation escalated further on November 1 when Bobrisky was removed from a KLM flight destined for Amsterdam at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport in Lagos, further fueling public interest in his legal battles.
In delivering the judgment on this particular case, Justice Alexander Owoeye ruled on November 28, 2024, stating that Bobrisky’s allegations of rights violations were without merit and lacked credible supporting evidence. The court found that the claims made by the applicant, Bobrisky, did not adequately substantiate the reliefs he sought against the EFCC and the National Assembly. The assessment of the evidence presented highlighted the insufficiency of Bobrisky’s claims, leading to the conclusion that there was no basis to support his requests for damages or injunctions.
The ruling emphasized the judiciary’s stance on the importance of credible evidence in fundamental rights cases. Justice Owoeye pointed out that the claims made against both the EFCC and the National Assembly lacked substantiation from the affidavit evidence submitted to the court. Furthermore, he concluded that the application for damages against the EFCC was unwarranted. This decision underscores the court’s commitment to upholding legal standards and ensuring that claims presented before it are backed by concrete evidence.
In response to the judgment, Dele Oyewale, the EFCC’s Head of Media and Publicity, expressed satisfaction with the outcome, indicating that the court’s evaluation of the evidence corroborated the commission’s stance. He maintained that Bobrisky had failed to present credible proof to justify the claims he had lodged against the EFCC, reiterating the court’s dismissal of his requests. The incident reflects broader issues surrounding celebrity culture, accountability, and the legal system’s response to allegations of misconduct within the realm of financial crimes.
This case highlights the ongoing tension between public figures and regulatory authorities, especially in the context of the Nigerian social media landscape. Bobrisky’s legal challenges serve as a reminder of the complexities that accompany fame, particularly concerning allegations of impropriety and their repercussions. The judgment not only affects Bobrisky’s personal circumstances but also sends a message about the necessity for concrete evidence in legal disputes, especially those involving claims of harassment and violations of rights. As such, the case will likely continue to resonate within discussions on legal rights and the responsibilities of high-profile individuals in navigating the law.
