By Eloghene Adaka, Esq.
In our present social media age, lots of assertions are made on the online space daily, both from blogs to daily users of social media platforms which makes it essential to distinguish between what amounts to defamation from what amounts to popular or usual opinions which do not amount to any breach of the law.
The Blacks law dictionary defines defamation as the act of injuring a person character, fame or reputation by false or malicious statements , it is further defined as the publication of a statement that tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of the society, which tends to expose him to hatred contempt or cause other persons to shun or avoid a person, or discredit him in his office trade or profession . Under Nigerian law, an individual’s right to protection of reputation extends to the reputation of a Corporate individual or personality. In Zenith Plastics Industry Ltd. v. Samotech Limited , Paras. F-B, the Court of Appeal held that it is the law that a corporate body, i.e. a legal person, could bring an action for libel against a person who has published material, the company believes has unjustly disparaged its business, the management of its business or unjustly states that the affairs of the company are conducted dishonestly.
The act of defamation is categorized into two namely libel and slander
- Libel – refers to defamation which is usually in the form of written or printed words and can include cartoons, caricature, television pictures or images or write-ups
- Slander – refers to defamation in the form of spoken words, whether visible or audible such as gestures, sounds, looks, or signs .
Thou both acts amount to defamation, the significant difference between libel and slander is that while slander is a civil wrong alone, libel can be both a civil wrong and a criminal offence as provided under section 373 of the Criminal code of Nigeria.
When Does defamation become actionable?
In considering whether to take action or whether words said amount to defamation, there are four essential elements which include
- The words or statements made must be a lie – the first factor to consider in determining Whether a word spoken amounts to defamation is whether such assertions are false, the communication of a word which is not true raises the presumption of malice (which does not connote spite or evil motive ) but the wrongful intention to do a wrongful act without an excuse or cause. However, it’s safe to say that not all negative comments on the online space amount to defamation, and for such statements to amount to defamation, they have to be false or a lie
- The words must refer to the person defamed – A party claiming defamation must also show that the defamatory statements refer to him or her; such words of reference need not be express as far as they can be understood even by one person that such references refer to the person defamed. Or reasonably obvious to an average person that such words refer to the person defamed
- The words must be published – publication of a defamatory word was defined in the case of Pullman v Hill and Co Ltd as the making known the defamatory matter after it has been written to someone other than the person whom it is written about, a word is seen to be published if it was seen by at least one person, other than the person defamed
- The words must be defamatory or cause harm – this entails that the words must have a tendency to injure or harm the reputation of the person whom it refers to, in other to lower him or her in the estimation of right-thinking members of the society or cause a feeling of hatred, fear ridicule or dislike
However, in differentiating defamation from abuse, abuse can be seen to be a mere vulgar word or insult that does not amount to any harm of a person’s reputation but a mere injury or feelings or to cause annoyance.
Remedies for defamation
Where a defamatory post or words have been made a person, they can sue for damages, where there is Proof of actual harm to compensate for injury done to his or her reputation, or an injunction to stop a person from making such publications
Despite the elements and remedies for defamation, there are exceptions where a person cannot sue or would an act would not to amount to defamation, and they include
I. Truth – no action can lie for a defamatory publication where such allegation is the truth,
ii. Fair comment – this amounts to statements of opinion which are arrived based on accurate facts on matters of public interest, examples include the conduct of the Government and public servants, the affairs of the parliament, etc. or matters which all though no public interest have been submitted to criticism by persons concerned
Iii. Minor errors in reporting, such as publishing a person’s age or title inaccurately or providing the wrong address;
Iv. Privilege: Statements made in the course of court/judicial proceedings; during debates, proceedings and probes of the legislative houses are covered by absolute privilege; and fair reporting of these judicial and legislative proceedings. Privilege may also be a defence in a case where a former employer gives an unfavourable reference of a person to a future employer, as long as he portrays what he believes to be the true picture and can back it up with evidence.
In conclusion , the later enables a person wronged to seek for compensation where he has suffered injury as a result of the false words or statements which are capable of destroying ones good reputation
