THERE'S A LIFE BEHIND THAT HANDLE: You're NOT IMMUNE TO CATCHING

The Great Boxing Legend Mike Tyson once said " Social Media Made you all way too comfortable with disrespecting people and not getting punched in the face for it"

As the heading states, there is a life behind those social media handles. What you say behind those social media handles, usernames and display pictures does not cease to exist in your physical reality. Your words have consequence, even those words said behind a screen with your twitter fingers. You are not immune to catching hands just because you mouthed off about someone on the internet. I feel we tend to forget, and this post is a reminder of that.

In putting expressing this reminder, i will be briefly discussing the defamation case of Apostle Johnson Suleman v Solomon Ashoms case number 27341/2021

ISSUE OF CONTENTION:

The issue in the court in this matter involves determining whether Solomon (the youtuber) through his social media publications, made defamatory statements to Apostle Suleman that were harming to his reputation in the eyes of a "reasonable ordinary and right thinking reader". The court in adjudicationg upon this action needed to determine whether elements of defamation were proven on a balance of probabilities and the remedy appropriate to resolving the issues at hand.

CASE BACKGROUND: Apostle Suleman v Ashoms

You have a youtuber, and social media dude, Ashoms and you have an Apostle , Apostle Suleman of Omega Fire Ministries( herein after referred to as the Apostle and the Youtuber). What happened is that the youtuber made some crazy publication across social media platforms regarding the Apostle. Publication accusing the Apostle of sexual assaults towards actress, corruption and bribery. It was nothing but filth being thrown at the Apostle doorsteps. The Apostle said enough is enough and commenced with action proceedings against the Youtuber. The Apsotle founded his action proceedings on the basis of Defamation law. He found the statements to malicious, fallacious and false remarks that could damage his reputation and that of his ministry. For some reason, the youtuber did not answer to this summons, and this allowed the Apostle to proceed by way of Default judgment. Default Judgment is a legal tool used to proceed with your matter when the other side does not seem to want to play ball. It's basically asking the court to give judgement on the matter because the other side refuses to participate in the judicial process of justice. The Apostle sought damages for the injuries he suffered as a result of the Youtubers publication. 10 million was the amount sought in order to repair the the damages the publication supposedly caused to the Apostle. And also an apology from the Youtuber was sought by the Apostle from the court.

As a result of the Youtuber's non-participation, the court only had the uncontested version of the Apostle which reduced the courts work in deciding the matter.

THE LEGAL PRINCIPLES APPLICABLE:

The action brought by the plaintiff in this matters is one founded on the claim of Defamation. The court therefor, in deciding the case, had to determine whether the plaintiff, on a balance of probabilities, was able to satisfy the requirements of Defamation.

• Requirements of Defamation include:

Wrongful &: The statements must be wrongful, in that they must not be protected by any legal priviledge or defence

Intentional: Must have been published intentionally or negligently

Publication: the statements must have been accessible to a third party

Involving Defamtory Statements: such statements must have been harmful to the person reputations or dignity.

• The Objective test to Determine as to whether statement is Defamatory:

  • This objective test involves an assessment on how a reasonable ordinary, right thinking person would perceive the statement within the context it was made

  • To understand how a reasonable right thinking person would have perceived, it essential we look at the impact of the statement on the plaintiff's reputation within a public lens.

  • There is a presumption of Wrongfulness and Intention upon the plaintiff making a claim that the statement was Defamatory.

    • The ball is therefore in the Defandants court to rebut the presumption that the statement are wrongful and defamatory

• Damages:

The determination of damages within Defamation cases are to compensate the plaintiff for injury to their reputation and dignity rather than for punitive purposes against the defendant

In coming to the conclusion of the appropriate damages compensable to the plaintiff, the court will consider the nature and extent of the defamatory statements; the circulation of the publications and the effect of such defamatory statements on the plaintiff

A court order of an Apology tends to be the order the court tends to mett out in resolving defamatory issues before court. It has been recognized by courts that an apology plays a significant role in restoring the plaintiffs dignity, reputation and humanity. Therefore court, in such matters, would normally issue an order to the effect that the defendant publish an apology for the public to see.

APPLICATION OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES:

Now there was not much deliberation from the court when it came to the determination of whether plaintiff established the elements of Defamation. Given the uncontested nature of these proceeding due to the non response of the Defandant to the summons, the presumption of Wrongfulness and Intention was established through a presumption that was not rebutted.

The element of publication was straightforward as the defendant published these statements across social media platforms for the third parties to consume.

In determining the element of whether the Statements were Defamatory, the court found that nature and extent of the statements where such that any reasonable, right thinking person would see them as harmful to the Apostles reputations and dignity and that the perception of a reasonable ordinary thinking person would be compromised by the statements made by the Youtuber. Objective test to determine whether statement is Defamatory was satisfied

On the damages front, the court provided that the purposes of compensation is to restore the dignity, reputation and humanity of the Apostle. Compensation for damages in such cases are not to punish the Defendant, as that is the role of criminal courts, not civil courts. The claim for damages in the amount of 10 million was found to be excess as such an award would defeat the purpose of compensation, which would be to restore one's honour, dignity and reputation . Compensation order in defamation cases are not to fatten one's pocket. An excessive compensation order would divert away from the court's duty to always attempt, wherever possible, to re-establish a dignified and respectful relationship between the parties. So in that spirit, the court found 35 000 to be an appropriate compensation order accompanied by an apology to be published on newspapers in South Africa and Nigeria

CONCLUSION

The court made a statement wherein it stated that Social media provides fertile ground from the mushrooming of self-acclaimed journos, who consider themselves such foolishly so and such persons have unfettered, unrestrained and are accountable to no one. As the court provided, i do see this judgement as a wake-up call for those who are internet journos spreading fallacious information and statement about people for the purpose of amassing clicks and licks

This judgement is the punch in the face to such person who have gotten comfortable with disrespecting people on the internet without getting punched in the face.

Disclaimer

The views and opinion expressed are those of my own, based on my own experiences and my subjective interpretation of the subject matter. They are not authority nor should they be construed to be authority. Do your research, read further, gain knowledge and do what you want with it. Non of the views expressed herein are legal advice. Always seek a legal practitioner for your legal problems