featured

Uni Mkar VC Urges Court To Dismiss ₦100.5bn Defamation Suit

The Vice-Chancellor of the University of Mkar, Benue State, Prof. Zacharys Gundu, has asked the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court to dismiss or strike out a ₦100.5 billion defamation suit filed against him by the Nasarawa State Government and Governor Abdullahi Sule.

In a notice of preliminary objection filed in suit No. FCT/HC/CV/3554/2024, Gundu challenged the competence of the action, describing it as frivolous and an abuse of court process, and urged the court to decline jurisdiction.

The objection, filed by his legal team led by Prof. Sebastian Hon, SAN, was argued before Justice Hamza Mu’azu, who reserved ruling after counsel to both parties adopted their submissions.

Gundu argued that the claimants failed to satisfy a mandatory condition precedent required under Order 2 Rule 8 of the FCT High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2025, rendering the suit incompetent.

He further contended that the action constituted an abuse of process, noting that the Nasarawa State Government, as the first claimant, lacked the legal capacity to institute a defamation suit, particularly as its name was not mentioned in the alleged defamatory statements.

According to the defendant, established common law principles do not permit a government to sue for defamation or claim damages arising from it.

In addition to the objection, Gundu filed a statement of defence, raising the defences of justification and fair comment. He maintained that the comments in question were made about the conduct of a public office holder in the discharge of official duties.

He said the remarks, allegedly made during a television programme, addressed matters of public interest, including security and land administration in Nasarawa State, areas in which Governor Sule serves as the state’s Chief Security Officer and Chief Trustee of land.

The Nasarawa State Government and the governor are seeking public retractions, ₦100.5 billion in damages, and the cost of the suit over the statements, which they claim portrayed them as promoting insecurity in the state.