Isaac Willie & Ors V. Sunday James Udo Ibiok (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HON. JUSTICE ISAIAH OLUFEMI AKEJU, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Akwa Ibom State, Ukanafun Division delivered on 26th June, 2006 in Suit No. HUK/12/92 commenced by the respondent through the Writ of summons filed at Uyo Division on 23rd April, 1992. The Statement of Claim was amended by the Amended Statement of Claim filed on 19th June, 2001, and in paragraph 17 thereof the respondent claimed against the appellants as follows:

“i. N1, 000,000.00 (One Million Naira) being special and general damages for libel in that the Defendant falsely, maliciously and vilely published of and concerning the plaintiff a letter title (sic) ‘VOTE-OF-NO-CONFIDENCE ON CHIEF SUNDAY UDO IBOK VILLACE HEAD OF NDOT IKOT EDA’ which letter was written and published to the President, Traditional rulers’ Oruk Anam Local Government council and also to the Clan Head Oruk Anam Local Government Area Secretary, Traditional Rulers’ Council all family Heads in Ndot Ikot Eda village, Ndot Clan Oruk Anam in which the Defendants particularly in paragraphs 1, 2 4 and 5 of the aforesaid letter called the plaintiff “a patron/mentor to celebrated thieves and all sorts of criminals”, armed robber etc which publication has greatly injured the plaintiff, a recognized village head, in his credit and reputation and has brought him into scandal, odium and contempt.

ii. An order directing the Defendants to publish a suitable retraction of the offending letter titled as above to all the quarters to which same was published and also and (sic) order directing the Defendant to publish in the Pioneer Newspaper offer an apology to the plaintiff, and

iii. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants by themselves servants, Agents and/or their privies from further publishing of the offending letter or one of a similar character against the plaintiff.”

Originally there were 9 defendants but as a result of death of some of them, only four of the defendants existed at the time of judgment on 26th June, 2006. The defendants’ (appellants’) Statement of Defence filed on 15th May, 1997 was amended through Amended Statement of Defence filed on 29th October, 2003 and the Further Amended Statement of Defence filed on 5th July, 2004.

At the trial, the respondent testified as PW1 and called another witness who was the PW2. Three witnesses testified for the defence as DW1, DW2 and DW3.

The facts relating to the respondent’s claim can be found in the paragraphs of the Statement of Claim (Amended) as follows:

“1. The Plaintiff is native of and resides at Ndot Ikot Eda village. He is also the village Head of Ndot Eda and had been so recognition (sic) by the then Civilian Government of Cross River State Chief (Dr) Clement N. Isong vide a Certificate of Recognition dated 7/9/82 which is hereby pleaded to be founded upon at the trial.

6. The plaintiff avers that on or about the 4th day of April, 1992 he received a letter dated 6th April, (sic) 1992 with Ref.

OA/TRC/AD/18/S.26.Vol.7 1/9 sent to the plaintiff by Mr. S. J. Isonguyo inviting Traditional Rulers council on Monday 13th April, 1992 for inquiry into an issue of vote-of-no-confidence passed on you by your subject.’ This letter is hereby pleaded to be founded at the trial.

7. The plaintiff avers that on or about the 20th August, 19991 (sic) he went to the Traditional rulers, council, Oruk Anam where he met the secretary, Mr. S. D. Isonguyo who gave him a letter written and signed by the Defendants, addressed to the Traditional rulers, council through the clan Head, Ndot Clan, and titled “VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE ON CHIEF SUNDAY UDO IBOK, VILLAGE HEAD OF NDOT IKOT EDA. The Defendants ere hereby put on notice to produce the original of the aforesaid letter.
8. The plaintiff avers that upon going through the contents of the aforesaid letter written by the Defendants, he was seriously embarrassed and injured in his feelings and so took the letter to his solicitors of Dr. A. Essen & Co. at Uyo.
9. Upon going through both the letter and the invitation the solicitors aforesaid advises the plaintiff not to stand trial before the Traditional Rulers Council because the issues raised in the letter bothered on serious gate?

The solicitors aforesaid also wrote a letter doted 10th April, 1992 with Ref. No.AE/SC/192/35 to the President Traditional Rulers Council, Oruk Anam Local Government Area wherein they advised the council to stay action on any inquiry into the allegations contained therein as they all bothered on criminality.

A copy of the aforesaid letter which was handed (sic) over to the Plaintiff by the Secretary aforesaid is hereby pleaded to be founded upon at the trial of this suit.

The Plaintiff avers that apart from sending the defamatory letter to the Traditional Rulers Council, the Defendants also sent copies to all clan Heads in Oruk Anam who are all members of the council. They also sent copies to villagers in Ndot Ikot Eda and the adjourning villages.”

Indeed the offensive part of the letter is set out in paragraph 10 of the Statement of claim as follows: