Some Lagos-based lawyers have described truth as a strong weapon against libellous actions.
The lawyers expressed the viewpoint in interviews with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Monday in Lagos.
According to them, defamation is generally a false statement of facts which causes damage to another’s reputation while libel is an aspect of defamation involving publication of falsehood against a person.
The lawyers were responding to questions as to what lawful remedies are available to defendants in defamation suits.
Mr Ogedi Ogu says a defamation suit is not without a remedy, as there are arguments which if successfully canvassed by a defendant, could defeat a defamation claim.
“It must be noted that because someone defames another person does not mean that a lawsuit will be successful under defamation.
“There is defence to defamatory claims,” he said.
Ogu advised that if an alleged defamer could successfully establish such defence, he should plead it in court.
“Truth is absolute defence to defamation; you must note that defamation is a false statement; so, if the statement is proven accurate and true, then, it is not defamatory. ”
Ogu added that absolute and qualified privileges were concrete defence against libel claims.
According to Ogu, absolute privilege gives a person the absolute right to make such a statement and keeps him immune from consequent defamatory claims.
He noted that qualified privilege also meant that a person making such statement had some rights to do so at the time.
Ogu said that outside these, an alleged defamer could also retract the defamatory statement and tender an apology.
He said that in such a situation, further claims would be dispensed.
Another lawyer, Mr Spurgeon Ataene, said a defamatory claim was not perfunctory.
According to him, an aggrieved person should rather be sure that the alleged defamatory statement is completely false.
Ataene added that the aggrieved person should be able to present the defamation as odious in the minds of right-thinking members of the public.
“The party defamed, who is suing, has an uphill task to prove that the publication has reduced his personality before right-thinking members of the public and that it brought him into public ignominy, ridicule and odium.
“The test for determining who the right-thinking members of the public are, must be that of the ordinary people on the streets, and not that of highly-educated people or idiots.
“Once there is no iota of truth in it, then it is libellous for which it is also required that the publication must be malicious,” he said.
Ataene said that the appropriate remedy in such a situation would be retraction with an apology, adding that compensation in such circumstances can be waived, if “truce is brokered and the issue resolved amicably”.
“The most important weapon in a defamatory claim is defence of justification, because same is considered true and not false,”
According to the lawyer, if justification succeeds, then the party suing for defamation will be “slammed” with a heavy cost. (NAN)
