The Aareonakakanfo of Yoruba, Iba Gani Adams, has instituted a N5 billion suit against Yoruba Nation agitator, Chief Sunday Adeyemo, popularly known as Igboho, before the Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan for alleged invasion of privacy.
Adams sued Igboho for the alleged publication of the telephone conversation between him and another person without his consent.
The claimant (Adams), in a suit marked: No. M/1006/2024, filed for the enforcement of his fundamental rights, stated that the respondents injured him severely in his highly exalted office of the Aareonakakanfo of Yorubaland with the publication.
In his Originating Motion on Notice, dated October 15, 2024, the applicant is seeking for a court order for a declaration that as a citizen of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, he has a constitutionally guaranteed right to the privacy of his home, correspondence, telephone conversations and telegraphy communications by virtue of section 37 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as Amended).
His fundamental rights procedures rules were brought pursuant to section 27, 37 and 46 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999 as amended, and Enforcement Act, Cap, A9, Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2004.
Also Read:
- Tinubu, others honour Braithwaite’s enduring legacy
- Lagos targets concealed vehicle plate numbers
- Kwara 2027: Bolarinwa joins race, pledges to address insecurity
- Richard Akinnola Foundation empowers journalists’ widows with N3.8m
- The Trinity of State Decay (II): Inside the loop of insecurity, by Max Amuchie
And also Sections 37 and 46 of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended.
The applicant is also praying the court to declare 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.”
The leader of the Oodua People’s Congress stated that the act of the respondent (Igboho) in publishing or broadcasting the private telephone conversation between him and another person in general public through the social media without his knowledge, authority is mischievous, egregious, reckless and gross to his fundamental right to privacy guaranteed under Section Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and injure him severely in his highly exalted office of the Aareonakakanfo of Yorubaland.
Adams is therefore demanding the sum of N5 billion as general and exemplary damages against Adeyemo (Igboho).
The 13-paragraph affidavit in support of his motion stated in part: “The applicant stated that sometime in April, 2024, the respondent came out on the social media that he is in possession of a recorded private telephone conversation which the applicant had with one Mr. Nurudeen Banjo who is based in the United States of America.
“Since then, the respondent has repeatedly and viciously attacked the Applicant on both the traditional media (print and audio visual) and on social media accusing the Applicant of labeling him (the Respondent) as a political thug/ mercenary, a murderer, a fraudster and so on in the said recorded private telephone conversation.
“The public exposure of the Applicant’s private telephone conversation with third party which was covertly recorded by the Respondent without his knowledge, consent and authority and which the Respondent, without his knowledge, consent and authority, had maliciously published to the general public had not only breached the Applicant’s private and fundamental rights, it has also caused him a serious embarrassment among the multitude of Nigerians.”
The Applicant therefore said it is wrongful and improper for private telephone communication or conversation between individuals to be brought out to the open or exposed by a third party, body or even agency of government without an order of court, without the knowledge, consent and approval of any of the conversationalists.
Adams added: “The public exposure of the Applicant’s private telephone conversation with the said Mr. Nurudeen Banjo which the Respondent or any person covertly recorded and made public to the generality of Nigerians without the knowledge, consent and authority of the had not only breached the applicant’s Fundamental Rights but has also caused him, a serious embarrassment among the multitude of Nigerians.”
