Tom Bassey Joe

PETER OBI DO NOT HAVE ANY REPUTATION TO PROTECT: Here is why; As a lawyer, I find the defamation suit reportedly instituted by @PeterObi against @realkenokonkwo rather curious and difficult to appreciate from a strategic standpoint. The essence of a defamation action is the protection of a reputation that has been unjustly damaged. However, where a public figure has been subjected to prolonged public criticism, political scrutiny, and widespread debate over their actions and statements, the practical challenge becomes demonstrating that the alleged defamatory statements have caused a fresh and measurable injury to an already contested public image. Does Peter Obi even have any reputation to protect? I doubt he has any reputation to be defamed. Reputation is not what a person value himself but what others value him. Peter Obi is banking enforcing a reputation that is long dead, therefore an action like this is laughable. In a democracy, political figures inevitably expose themselves to intense criticism, and the law of defamation must be carefully balanced against the constitutional right to freedom of expression. The courts are not intended to become venues for settling every political disagreement or silencing harsh opinions. Nevertheless, whether the action succeeds or fails ultimately depends on the specific words complained of, whether they are statements of fact or opinion, their truth or falsity, whether they were published to third parties, and whether they have lowered the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. Let me emphasize it here again, right-thinking members of the society does not include members of the OBIDIENTS movement. E. O. Ogar, Esq.

Let me expose this repugnant bigot @Alex_Barbir even further. Before finding his way to Nigeria, he was in Granada, where the people have been living peacefully. Maybe he wanted to take advantage of the historical pain of the 1492 and 1824 conflicts that ended the last remnants of Islamic rule on the Iberian Peninsula. But today Granada enjoys peaceful coexistence among multiple faiths despite being a home to Catholics, Protestants, and a growing population of Muslims, Jews, and other religions. This bigot Alex Barbir, went there thinking he could ignite a religious crisis or spread hatred, but he failed. Immediately after, he surfaced in Nigeria parading himself as a humanitarian. He has since been exposed as a fake peacekeeper hiding behind a charitable face to incite violence and turn Christians against Muslims, all driven by his deep hatred toward Islam. Knowing that Nigerians pay much attention to religious issues, he is weaponizing that sensitivity to push his malicious Christian genocide narrative and spark a full-blown religious conflict. Next, we are going after those who are bankrolling him. He has absolutely no track record of any real humanitarian work anywhere else before coming to Nigeria, where he was finally exposed and deported by the Federal Government. May God continue to expose him, shatter his evil plans against our dear country Nigeria. Abu Muh’d

PETER OBI DO NOT HAVE ANY REPUTATION TO PROTECT: Here is why; As a lawyer, I find the defamation suit reportedly instituted by @PeterObi against @realkenokonkwo rather curious and difficult to appreciate from a strategic standpoint. The essence of a defamation action is the protection of a reputation that has been unjustly damaged. However, where a public figure has been subjected to prolonged public criticism, political scrutiny, and widespread debate over their actions and statements, the practical challenge becomes demonstrating that the alleged defamatory statements have caused a fresh and measurable injury to an already contested public image. Does Peter Obi even have any reputation to protect? I doubt he has any reputation to be defamed. Reputation is not what a person value himself but what others value him. Peter Obi is banking enforcing a reputation that is long dead, therefore an action like this is laughable. In a democracy, political figures inevitably expose themselves to intense criticism, and the law of defamation must be carefully balanced against the constitutional right to freedom of expression. The courts are not intended to become venues for settling every political disagreement or silencing harsh opinions. Nevertheless, whether the action succeeds or fails ultimately depends on the specific words complained of, whether they are statements of fact or opinion, their truth or falsity, whether they were published to third parties, and whether they have lowered the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. Let me emphasize it here again, right-thinking members of the society does not include members of the OBIDIENTS movement. E. O. Ogar, Esq.