Chief P.N. Nsirim Vs E.A. Nsirim (1990)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OBASEKI. J.S.C.

Proceedings in the matter of appeal to this court were first instituted in the High Court of the Rivers State of Nigeria Holden at Port Harcourt. In that court, the plaintiff/appellant claimed as per paragraph 8 of the statement of claim: “N100,000 (one hundred thousand Naira) being general damages for libel published of and concerning the plaintiff on the 20th day of April, 1982 in a document of that date circulated by the defendant to all and sundry”. Pleadings were filed and served and at the close of pleadings, the issues joined came before Jacks. J.. for hearing and determination. The defendant/respondent while admitting writing the offending document, denied its publication.

The offending libel was pleaded in paragraph 3 of the statement of claim as follows: On or about the 20th day of April, 1982, the defendant without reasonable and probable cause held a press conference at the press centre in which the defendant alleged falsely and maliciously of and concerning the plaintiff in the presence of most of the editors and reporters of the national newspapers in Port Har­court and headed ‘MY LIFE IS IN DANGER’ the following: ‘Gentlemen of the Press, l am happy for your honouring my invitation today the 16th day of April, 1982. It is my wish to brief you this morning of insecurity of some of us in Rumueme Community especially the threat of our leader to eliminate me and any aspiring youth and the members of Rumueme welfare organisation by our community leader.

Of late, our lives are in danger. He has been organising meeting announcing to them that very soon some of us could be found dead at night. Chief 0. N. Nsirim has also giving (sic) a special message through one Grace Nworgumati to be delivered to me that he has given me and one Mr. Lawson Chinda the last warning, that anything can happen to us any moment from now and nobody is going to talk of it as far as this State is concerned. This threat comes from a big man and I feel any big man can do anything at any time because they say money is the root of all evils.

For some time now, the Chief has been chasing me from pillar to post using his wealth and position to influence the police and Nigerian Security Organisation to harass me almost everyday and the youth of this community. Because of this I have written series of letters to the Chief and copied to the Commissioner of Police, Governor and the Attorney-General informing them of the danger I have been placed upon. Gentlemen, up to this point of briefing you, I have.I neither heard anything from the police nor the Government. In other words, if I have been killed before, nobody would have been held responsible.

It is in view of this that I have decided to invite you to tell the world through your media the danger facing me. It will be recalled that the rule of law in a civilised world like ours is not in existence in this our community Rumueme because of our leader who claim that he has right to do whatever he likes. Since the leader of this community has announced to the people of this community sometime in November last year that he has decided a state of emergency in this community, from that day, things have been falling apart almost every day in this community which resulted that on the 2nd day of January, 1982, a house being built by one Vincent Ehule, a final year student in U.S.A., who is due to be back by June this year was bulldozed down by the Chief.

The matter was reported to the Police, but was in silence up till today. Youths are no longer given farm lands because of their opposition to injustice in Rumueme. On Monday the 12th day of April, 1982, some group of people acting by the order of the Chief broke and entered into my Estate and knocked down one of the flats in the Estate for which the Chief sued me in the High Court, Port Harcourt. One wonders why the rule of law is not in practice in this part of the State. I would like to take you round to the site for which you members of the Press to see things for yourselves. I am calling on every Nigerian particularly the Law Enforcement Agencies to come to my aid.

Firstly, to give me protection for my life because my life is really in danger. The chief has vowed to kill me at all costs and nobody will talk of it. As I told you before, any big man can do anything at any time and get out of it. They say ‘prevention is better than cure’ by that I mean, it will be better to prevent my life (being taken) rather than to set up enquiry into circumstances surrounding the death. Please gentlemen. help to deliver my message to the people of this country for their information and to alert them that we here are living under Autocratic Rule. Thank You, Sgd. Mr. E. A. Nsirim What is said at the Press Conference was in a typewritten document copies of which were circulated and distributed to those present at the Conference. The plaintiff will at the trial rely on the said document signed by the defendant. 4. The natural and ordinary meaning in that publication is that the plaintiff is a man of very doubtful character, dishonest and undemocratic in the way he carries on the affairs of Rumueme.

Furthermore, he does not encourage competitive progress in Rumueme community. He is oppressive and a criminal. 5. The defendant was understood to mean by those to whom the words were published of and concerning that the plaintiff is a dishonest man and plaintiff is of dubious character, oppressive and undemocratic in all his ways and a criminal.; In his statement of defence, he denied the above paragraphs of the statement of claim as well as paragraphs 6 and 8 not reproduced herein. The defendant denied publication of the said defamatory statement and went on to plead in paragraph 3 and 4 of his statement of defence as follows:

3. The defendant denies paragraph 3 of the Statement of Claim and would at the trial put the plaintiff to the strictest proof of all the averments in that paragraph. 4. In further answer to the said paragraph the defendant would state as follows: (a) that there was no press conference held by him at any time and at any place; (b) that in fact a press conference was contemplated and for which purpose the said publication was prepared by him, but on a second thought, the idea was shelved; (c) that the said publication was therefore not published to anyone but was rather kept in his office under lock and key;

(d) that as a result of trouble between the plaintiff and the de­fendant over certain piece of land at Rumueme and over the running of O.C.C. Nigeria Limited, the plaintiff on several occasions and especially on 26th April, 1982, broke into the defendant’s private business premises and removed several documents including the said publication; (e) that it was the plaintiff himself who published the contents of the said intended press briefing if at all. 5. It will be contended at the trial that the defendant did not publish or procure the publication of the words referred to in the statement of claim. There was therefore a serious issue joined on publication. The issue went to trial and the learned trial Judge, Jacks, J., found in favour of the plaintiff/appellant and awarded him general damages in the sum of N100,000.00 with N200.00 costs. The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal and won.

On the issue of publication. the learned trial Judge said – “Plaintiff’s witness, Tons Fetepigi, who is not an interested witness and at the material time the Group News Editor of the Nigerian Tide Newspaper has given evidence to the effect that one of the reporters brought a copy of the press release to them on 20th April, 1982 and that defendant later went to him to solicit publication.

I have no hesitation in believing his evidence. Therefore plaintiff could not have removed defendant’s file including what he called the intended press release after 20th April, 1982. 1 therefore find as a fact that the offending press release was published by defendant on 20th April. 1982. In addition, Exhibit ‘A’ which is a copy of the press release confirms this fact”. On this issue of publication, the Court of Appeal had a lot to say. Akpata, JCA.(delivering the lead judgment concurred in by Aseme, JCA. and Ogundare, JCA.) said: “It is clear that the learned trial Judge rejected the defence of appellant that the publication was done by the respondent himself.

The issue therefore is whether he was right in holding as he did that the offending document was published by the defendant on 20th April, 1982”. The learned trial Judge up to this point of the judgment, avoided or inadvertently omitted to state where the document was published and to whom. There is nothing to suggest in the judgment of the learned trial Judge that he accepted the case for the respondent that the publication was at the press centre. To crown the whole folly, the respondent concluded his case without calling as a witness one of the reporters to whom copies of Exhibit A was published. I find myself unable to accept the contention of the respondent’s counsel that the evidence of the respondent himself which has not been shown to have been believed by the trial Judge or the fact that the appellant approached P.W.1 with a copy of Exhibit ‘A’ to solicit its publication which is inadmissible in evidence established his claim against the appellant as pleaded by him. The fact that the learned trial Judge rejected the defence of the appellant is no proof that he published Exhibit ‘A’ and copies thereof at the press centre on 20th April, 1982. So far, I have based this judgment on the ground that it was not established by the respondent that the appellant published the offending document at the press centre.