The legal battle between social media critic Martins Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan, VDM, and Warri-based cleric Prophet Jeremiah Omoto Fufeyin intensified on Monday as music-streaming platform Audiomack removed VDM’s diss track “Ole” in compliance with a court order.
The deletion follows an interlocutory injunction granted by the Federal Capital Territory High Court, Nyanya Division, in a ₦1 billion defamation suit filed by Fufeyin against the outspoken influencer.
The suit, marked FCT/CV/3340/2024, centres on allegations that VDM’s song and social media commentaries defamed the prophet and disparaged his “miracle products.”
At the last sitting, Justice A. Y. Shafa dismissed preliminary objections raised by VDM’s legal team and granted a full interlocutory injunction restraining him from publishing, uploading, or distributing any further allegedly defamatory material against the cleric.
The court also ordered a return to the status quo ante bellum, effectively halting further circulation of the contentious content.
In compliance with the court order, Fufeyin’s lawyers served formal notice on digital platforms, prompting Audiomack to remove the track. Searches for “Ole” on the platform now return the message: “This song cannot be found or has been removed.”
The dispute began months ago when VDM publicly questioned the safety and certification of Fufeyin’s miracle-themed products.
ALSO READ: Iyabo Ojo drags the police over VDM privacy breach
He later released “Ole”, a rap track widely interpreted as targeting the Warri-based cleric. Prophet Fufeyin responded by filing the ₦1 billion lawsuit, insisting that the lyrics and accompanying online posts damaged his reputation, ministry, and the faith of his followers.
He is seeking damages and a permanent injunction against further publication. VDM has argued that his interventions fall under freedom of expression and fair comment, claiming he only sought accountability from religious leaders.
Supporters maintain that his statements are in the public interest, particularly where health-related products are concerned.
Legal analysts say the case highlights the balance between protecting individual reputations and safeguarding freedom of expression in Nigeria’s digital space.
Interim injunctions, though temporary, can have a chilling effect by compelling platforms to remove contested material even before final judgment.
For platforms like Audiomack, the case underscores their role in Nigerian legal disputes. By complying with court orders, platforms shield themselves from potential contempt but raise questions about due process for creators whose content is removed.
The matter has been adjourned to October 27, 2025, for continuation of the substantive hearing. Until then, the injunction remains in force, preventing VDM from re-uploading the song or publishing new commentary directly linked to Prophet Fufeyin.
As both sides prepare for the continuation of the case, the dispute is shaping debates about the limits of online criticism, accountability of public figures, and the authority of Nigerian courts over digital platforms.
Premium Times
