Concerns have escalated in the media and political space over the arrest of Dele Farotimi, alongside a reported invasion of his law firm and harassment of his staff by alleged members of the Nigerian Police Force. As of the time of this statement, Dele Farotimi has been arraigned on a 16-count charge for alleged defamation and cybercrimes before a Magistrate Court in Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State. After pleading not guilty, he was denied bail and remanded in prison custody, highlighting a troubling decline in the operations of our democracy.

The issues surrounding Farotimi’s arrest stem from a petition alleging defamation in his recently published book, “Nigeria and Its Criminal Justice System.” The controversy has triggered concerns about the nature of defamation, its purpose, and the role of the Nigerian Police in such matters.

Understanding Defamation

Defamation is the publication of a statement that lowers a person’s reputation in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. It is a civil wrong intended to protect an individual’s good name from being tarnished. Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) guarantees freedom of expression, including the right to hold opinions and disseminate information. However, when such expressions harm another’s reputation, defamation laws come into play.

Only a court of competent jurisdiction can determine whether a person’s reputation has been damaged, and this is done through a civil trial. In such cases, the burden of proof lies with the party alleging the defamation. The Nigerian Police have no legal authority to determine defamation through criminal investigation or prosecution.

Defamation Is a Civil Wrong, Not a Criminal Offense

Defamation, however serious, does not constitute a criminal offense under Nigerian law. It is a tortious liability that requires civil redress. The appropriate action for someone who feels defamed is to file a civil lawsuit, not to involve law enforcement. The Supreme Court affirmed this position in Aviomoh v. The Commissioner of Police & Sunday Esan (2021) JELR 109176 (SC), where it held that defamation is a civil matter.

The Nigerian Police are mandated by Sections 4 and 24 of the Police Act, 2020, to maintain law and order by addressing criminal offenses—not civil disputes. Their involvement in Farotimi’s case constitutes a clear breach of their legal mandate.

Misuse of the Nigerian Police

It is unfortunate that certain elites, who often urge citizens to “go to court” when aggrieved, resort to using the Nigerian Police as a tool of intimidation when it suits their personal interests. If any individual or entity feels defamed, the appropriate course of action is to seek redress in court—not to engage in unlawful arrests and harassment.

Call for Justice

We condemn the arrest and continued detention of Dele Farotimi, which constitutes a desecration of the Nigerian Constitution and legal system. We urge the government to act honorably and resolve this matter in the interest of justice.

Chief Ameh Peter
National Secretary, CUPP
Former National Chairman, IPAC
Ex-Presidential Candidate

By Yisa Usman FCA, FCTI

The proposed tax reforms mark a transformative moment in Nigeria’s fiscal evolution, focusing on modernization and addressing challenges rooted in outdated pre-colonial tax laws and redundant systems that burden businesses and individuals. These reforms aim to streamline tax administration and improve Value Added Tax (VAT) processes, providing a pathway toward equitable revenue distribution and fiscal decentralization. However, while the potential benefits are substantial, addressing significant challenges and equity concerns is critical to ensuring the reforms achieve their objectives.

A comparative analysis of Nigeria’s tax system against those of countries like Kenya, the United States, and other nations with comparable political structures reveals stark disparities that emphasize the critical need for reform. These nations have leveraged robust tax frameworks to achieve significant economic growth, foster local economic activities, and ensure a more equitable distribution of national resources, outcomes that starkly contrast with Nigeria’s performance. In Nigeria, outdated legislation, inadequate tax assessment and recovery system, and systemic corruption have created inefficiencies and exacerbated inequalities. The lack of effective mechanisms to optimize tax revenue further hampers the nation’s fiscal sustainability and economic competitiveness, making comprehensive reform an urgent necessity.

Nigeria’s reliance on antiquated tax laws has long hindered administrative efficiency and equitable resource allocation. These reforms seek to modernize the tax framework, aligning it with global best practices to foster economic development and decentralization. Key objectives include streamlining administration to eliminate duplicative tax practices, centralizing data to enhance accuracy in tax derivation and remittance, and empowering states to take greater responsibility for revenue generation and allocation, in line with the principles of fiscal federalism.

The proposed increase in derivation weight from 20% to 60% introduces a dual-edged dynamic. On the one hand, it incentivizes states to boost local economic activities and align revenue allocation with consumption patterns. On the other hand, it raises concerns about exacerbating existing inequalities, with states like Lagos, Ogun, Rivers and Kano poised to benefit disproportionately due to their robust economic bases, while resource-poor states may face disadvantages.

The reforms are supported by compelling arguments, including their potential to decentralize economic development by motivating states to leverage local resources and attract investments. The allocation of a larger revenue share to states promises improved infrastructure and public services, particularly in states that prioritize economic growth. Additionally, by leveraging technology to track consumption patterns, the reforms should enhance transparency and fiscal responsibility.

Nonetheless, the reforms face significant challenges. A heavy reliance on derivation risks marginalizing less affluent states, deepening socio-economic disparities. The reforms’ implementation will require extensive data collection and systemic upgrades, posing logistical and financial challenges. Furthermore, the reduction in population-based allocations from 30% to 20% could generate social and political tensions in densely populated states struggling to meet citizens’ needs.

To balance these opportunities and risks, several recommendations are essential. First, the derivation weight increase should be phased in, starting with a modest adjustment from 20% to say 30%-40%, allowing states and corporations to adapt gradually. Second, a centralized, dynamically updated tax database is critical for accurate derivation tracking and dispute reduction. Third, a revenue equalization mechanism, such as a stabilization fund, can support economically weaker states during the transition. Fourth, capacity-building initiatives should equip state tax authorities with the necessary skills and resources to manage the new system effectively. Fifth, standardized procedures for VAT collection, derivation tracking, and dispute resolution should be established to ensure consistency across states. Finally, fostering public engagement with stakeholders, including state governments, businesses, and civil society, will promote transparency, address concerns, and build collective ownership of the reforms.

These reforms not only resolve immediate administrative inefficiencies but also lay the foundation for a more equitable and sustainable fiscal system. By addressing pre-independence legacy laws and fostering economic accountability, Nigeria has an opportunity to position itself for inclusive growth, ensuring all states contribute to and benefit from national development. However, achieving these outcomes requires a careful balance between incentivizing derivation-based revenue sharing and providing mechanisms to support resource-poor states. With a focus on equity and efficiency, the reforms can establish a tax system that empowers businesses, strengthens states, and improves the living standards of citizens across the federation.

Yisa Usman is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria (ICAN), a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria (CITN), and a doctoral candidate at the Nigerian Defence Academy, Kaduna

By Ehichioya Ezomon

In my November 18, 2024, article entitled, “That ‘fake’ Sanwo-Olu vs EFCC suit: Whodunit it? Who sponsored it?” I held that snapets from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) moves to investigate, arrest, detain and prosecute ex-governors “are telegraphed a few months or weeks before they bow out of office,” so giving them the jitters to “either begin to express being squeaky clean, alleging political witch-hunt or daring the EFCC to carry out its threat to make them account for their stewardship.” 
I however observed that lately, the anti-graft agency’s threat against former governors “has become mostly academic, and the norm rather than the exception,” adding that, “it appears some ex-governors now relish being dragged by the EFCC, at least, as a way to keeping themselves in the news after missing the years of free spotlighting.”
Former Governor Yahaya Bello of Kogi State has mostly proved these assertions right, even as he finally presented himself to the EFCC for “arrest and detention,” and arraignment and prosecution for alleged looting of Kogi’s resources during his eight-year tenure in office (2016-2024).
For months, Bello’s engaged in a hide-and-seek, only to suddenly show up at the EFCC headquarters in Abuja on September 18, and yet wasn’t booked, interrogated, or detained – as he’s on the wanted list of the agency and the courts – but with the commission reportedly asking him to leave and come back at a later date. Why?
EFCC’s intel reportedly indicated that Bello’s prepared for a showdown, having allegedly stormed the premises with armed details. Thus, the authorities tactically allowed him to while away for hours in one of the offices. Indeed, EFCC’s later efforts that night to arrest Bello at the Kogi State Government Lodge in Asokoro, Abuja, were allegedly thwarted by his armed guards.
Bello, facing a couple of EFCC’s alleged fraudulent cases in courts in Abuja, continued in his disappearing act, while the commission failed in its attempts to force his trial – in absentia – before Justice Emeka Nwite on October 30 at the Federal High Court in Abuja, where Bello’s facing a 19-count charge for alleged laundering of N84bn.  
But on November 26, Bello – billed for arraignment since April 2024 – reappeared at the EFCC headquarters in Abuja, and this time, the agency “detained” him overnight in the facility he’d avoided for months, as he shunned invitations and court summons to answer for his alleged looting of resources during his governorship of ‘The Confluence State’.
And on November 27, the EFCC arraigned Bello and two others – Shuaibu Oricha and Abdulsalam Hudu – before Justice Maryanne Anenih of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Maitama, Abuja, on a 16-count charge for conspiracy, criminal breach of trust and possession of unlawfully-obtained property, amounting to N110.4bn.
After some legal fireworks over bail for the three defendants between the lead counsel for the accused, Joseph Daudu (SAN) and the EFCC, Kemi Pinheiro (SAN), Justice Anenih adjourned ruling on the application to December 10, and directed that the defendants should remain in the EFCC custody.
This notwithstanding the EFCC administrative bail granted to Oricha and Hudu, which Pinheiro argued had expired in October, but with Daudu pointing to a fresh application of November 22, based on the fact that the defendants deserve their liberty on the presumption of innocence until they’re proven guilty, as alleged.
Meanwhile, Bello certainly was in a celebratory mood when – for the first time in over seven months of a cat-and-mouse game with the EFCC – he’s docked for the alleged N110.4bn theft of Kogi’s resources. Dressed in a pair of contact lenses, and a light sky-blue attire, Bello, amidst a throng of aides and political associates,  walked energetically through the expansive premises and into the courtroom of the FCT High Court.
As he covered the distance from the parking lot to the courtroom, Bello’s all smiles – as he turned right and waved with the right hand, and then turned left and waved with the left hand – to acknowledge greetings and cheers from his supporters, many of whom sandwiched him into the court, where he continued to return courtesies even while in the dock to plead not guilty to the charges preferred against him.
Perhaps to Bello, his arraignment was a moment to savour, and bask in the frenzy of journalists and EFCC’s operatives scrambling to capture and record his every posture and every gesture as evidence, and for prime-time broadcast and publication in the mainstream and online media.
A similar scenario played out on November 29, at the Federal High Court in Abuja, where Bello couldn’t take his plea, and had to “stand for himself” in the absence of his lead lawyer in the suit, Abdulwahab Mohammed (SAN).
With well-armed security operatives falling over themselves to dominate the court premises, Bello, with a more somber mien this time, and accompanied by aides, supporters and operatives of the EFCC, still walked briskly into the courtroom, with the door quickly closed behind him. 
Once inside, as reported by PUNCH ONLINE, Bello told trial Justice Emeka Nwite that he won’t take any plea, as he’s only made aware of his arraignment in the night of November 28, and couldn’t get across to his lawyer, Mohammed (SAN). This prompted the judge – in the interest of fair hearing – to order that Mohammed be put on notice for the adjourned date of December 13, and for Bello and his co-defendants to be reminded in the EFCC custody.
The EFCC lawyer, Pinheiro (SAN), attempted to convince Justice Nwite to commence the trial without Bello’s counsel, arguing that, “What the law requires is the presence of the defendant, not the presence of his lawyers.” 
This was reportedly a rehash of a similar argument at the sitting on October 30, when Pinheiro requested that the court proceed with the trial. Noting that two witnesses were present and ready to testify,” Pinheiro suggested that the “court enter a plea of not guilty on Bello’s behalf and commence the trial.”
But as in that prior instance, the judge turned down Pinheiro’s entreaty on November 29, citing Bello’s right to a fair hearing, and reminding the EFCC lawyer that, at the October court session, the matter was adjourned to January 21, 2025.
“The matter came up on the 30th of October 2024. It was adjourned to 21st January 2025. From the statement of the defendant, his lawyers are not aware of today’s (November 29) date. In the interest of fair hearing, I will not proceed for arraignment,” Justice Nwite said.
“This matter is peculiar in the sense that we have already agreed on a date, which is in January. It will be unfair if the matter is taken without the defendant’s counsel. It would be a different thing if the defendant had no counsel.
“Since the defendant has said his counsel is not aware of today’s proceeding, I am of the view that a bench warrant cannot be sacrificed on the altar of fair hearing. The defendant deserves to be represented by counsel,” the judge added.
After the court waited for 45 minutes, “but with no sign of the defence counsel,” Justice Nwite adjourned the matter, directed that Bello remain in the EFCC custody until the next hearing on December 13, and granted Pinheiro’s application for “new date hearing motions and possible arraignment to be served on the defendant’s counsel.”
As the clock ticks towards December 10 at the FCT High Court, and December 13 at the Federal High Court both in Abuja, will Bello and his co-defendants get a bail reprieve, or be further remanded in the EFCC custody, or sent behind bars at one of Nigeria’s capital city’s jail houses, to spend the Yuletide season there? Such would be a canny experience the ex-governor had fought strenuously for months to avoid!

Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria. Can be reached on X, Threads, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp @EhichioyaEzomon. Tel: 08033078357