Court of Appeal Throws Out Mo Abudu's Libel Appeal Against Child Rights Advocate
- The Court of Appeal in Lagos dismissed Mo Abudu's appeal on July 2, 2026, affirming the earlier High Court ruling that threw out her libel claims
- Abudu had sought N1.4 billion in damages over a 2009 opinion article in THISDAY newspaper that she said damaged her reputation over a charity concert
- The court ruled that Abudu failed to produce independent witnesses to prove the publication harmed her reputation, and upheld fair comment and justification defences
Media entrepreneur Mo Abudu has lost her bid to revive a long-running libel case after the Court of Appeal in Lagos unanimously dismissed her appeal on 2 July 2026, backing the Lagos State High Court's earlier decision to throw out her claims against child rights advocate Oluyemisi Wada.
The dispute traces back to September 2009, when Wada authored an opinion piece titled "Mute Voices" in THISDAY newspaper.
Source: Instagram
Abudu argued the article insinuated that money raised from a charity concert organised to benefit street children had been misappropriated.
She went to court seeking N700 million in general damages, a further N700 million in aggravated damages, public retractions and apologies in national newspapers and online, and an injunction against any further publication of the statements.
Why the Court Ruled Against Abudu
A three-member panel comprising Justices Muslim Sule Hassan, Folasade Ayodeji Ojo and Polycarp Terna Kwahar found no grounds to overturn the lower court's decision.
Justice Hassan, who delivered the lead judgment, acknowledged that Wada admitted authoring the piece but stressed that authorship alone does not prove libel.
The court held that a claimant must go further and show, through credible evidence, that the publication reached third parties and actually damaged how those parties regarded her.
"A person's reputation is not based on the good opinion he has of himself but the estimation in which others hold him," the court stated.
Abudu had testified that friends and associates reached out to her after the article appeared, yet not one of them was brought to the stand during the trial.
The court indicated that even a single independent witness speaking to how the publication affected their view of Abudu would have been enough to meet that threshold.
Source: Instagram
Public Interest and the Fair Comment Defence
Beyond the evidential gap, the appellate court also upheld Wada's twin defences of justification and fair comment. Because the charity concert had solicited donations from the general public, the court reasoned that questions about how those funds were managed were squarely in the public interest.
It noted that as a prominent public figure who actively sought donations, Abudu should reasonably have anticipated scrutiny over the administration of those funds.
"It would not cost the appellant anything to provide explanation of her dealing with the funds generated from the public," the court observed, characterising the article as a call for transparency rather than an attack on Abudu's character.
The court also declined to read malice into Wada's decision to report her concerns to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, viewing it instead as conduct consistent with her advocacy work and her involvement in the fundraising effort.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Ojo drew a clear line between writing a document and legally publishing it, reiterating that defamation liability requires proof of communication to a third party. Justice Kwahar agreed, dismissing procedural objections before concluding that the appeal lacked merit on substance.
The Court of Appeal affirmed the Lagos State High Court judgment delivered on 3 May 2019 and made no order as to costs.
Mo Abudu dismisses cabal claim within Nollywood
Legit.ng reported that media entrepreneur Mo Abudu dismissed allegations that a "cinema cabal" exists in Nollywood to favour certain films while sidelining others. She insisted that cinema scheduling is based on business realities rather than favouritism.
Abudu added that cinemas allocate screening slots according to audience demand and commercial performance.
Source: Legit.ng
