- Court Restrains UK Activist, Facebook Over Alleged Defamation of Natasha
-
Meta ordered to remove content and preserve digital evidence
-
Judge says injunction protects reputation pending full trial
A Federal High Court sitting in the Federal Capital Territory has granted an interlocutory injunction restraining a United Kingdom based activist, Dr Sandra Duru, also known as Prof Mgbeke, and Meta Platforms Inc., owners of Facebook, from further circulating materials alleged to be defamatory against the senator representing Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
EDITOR’S PICKS
- Kano: ‘I Will Not Abandon Kwankwaso’ – Gov Yusuf’s Aide Resigns
- 5 Health Risks Men Face After Age 40
- CBN to Introduce New Policy to Regulate Debit Card Issuance, ATM Operations
EKO HOT BLOG reports that Justice I. Mohammed delivered the ruling in Suit No FCT HC CV 229 2025, following a motion on notice filed by Akpoti-Uduaghan, who sought urgent protection against what she described as sustained online attacks on her reputation.
In a Certified True Copy of the ruling sighted on Saturday, the court held that the application raised a serious question for trial and that immediate intervention was necessary to prevent irreparable damage pending the determination of the substantive suit.
The judge ordered that Duru, whether personally or through agents, be restrained from publishing, sharing or promoting on Facebook or any other platform any material containing defamatory, scandalous or injurious content against the claimant.
In a related order, Meta Platforms Inc. was directed to immediately take down or disable access to all offending posts published by the first defendant, either in her name or under the pseudonym Prof Mgbeke.
The court further ordered Meta to preserve and secure all electronic evidence, including content, metadata and digital records linked to the disputed posts, to aid the fair determination of the case.
Justice Mohammed said the injunction was preservatory and not punitive, noting that the claimant had established a prima facie case of ongoing defamation with potential harm not adequately compensable by damages.
The court also took note of allegations that the first defendant published over 30 posts between May and October 2025, exposing the claimant to hostility, security threats and emotional distress.
The ruling is seen as a significant step in addressing online defamation and platform accountability within Nigeria’s digital rights landscape.
