Court Issues Kenneth Okonkwo 42-Day Ultimatum To Enter Appearance Or Risk Judgment In Absentia
An Anambra State High Court in Onitsha has directed Mr Kenneth Okonkwo to appear and defend himself in the defamation case instituted against him by Mr Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) within 42 days.
The court in an endorsed Writ for Service dated June 25, said Okonkwo should enter an appearance in the case within 42 days of service or the Plaintiff may proceed and judgment may be given in his absence.
“You are hereby commanded that within 42 days after the service of this Writ on you, inclusive of the day of such service, you do cause an appearance to be entered for you in the High Court of Anambra State, Onitsha Judicial Division.
“Take notice that in default of your so doing within 42 days of service or the Plaintiff may proceed and judgment may be given in his absence,” it said.
Recall that Peter Obi through his lawyer, Alex Ejesieme SAN in Suit no: 0/229/26 demanded N5 billion in damages against Okonkwo for defamation.
Obi prayed the court to declare that the
statements made Okonkwo on June 8 during his appearance on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily were false, malicious, baseless and defamatory.
He urged the court to cause Okonkwo to pay him the sum of N5 billion in damages for the injury it caused to his reputation, character, integrity, public image, political standing and goodwill as well as aggravated damages in the sum of 2 billion for his persistence and repetition of the publications.
Obi said Okonkwo should also pay him an exemplary damages in the sum of 1 billion his deliberate repetition and amplification of the imputations after notice of his complaint.
“An Order directing the Defendant, within seven days of judgment, to publish at his expense a full, unreserved and unequivocal retraction and apology as approved by this Honourable Court, on Channels Television and Channels Television’s YouTube platform; on the Defendant’s accounts on X, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok and YouTube; and in three national daily newspapers.
“An Order directing that every retraction and apology published on a social-media account of the Defendant shall remain prominently displayed and, where the platform permits, pinned to the top of the account for so long as the account remains active, and shall not be deleted, hidden, archived or restricted
“An Order directing the Defendant to delete and remove from every social-media account, page, channel, website and digital platform under his ownership or control each interview, post, repost, video, caption, comment or publication containing the defamatory words complained of in this action.
“An Order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant, whether by himself, his servants, agents, representatives, privies or any person acting upon his instruction, from further publishing, broadcasting, posting, reposting, distributing or circulating the words complained of or any substantially similar allegation imputing bribery, fraud, scam, theft, extortion, criminality or membership or leadership of a criminal gang to the Plaintiff,” it said.