Blog

Minister of Information and Communications, Prof Dora Akunyili, has rejected the explanation offered by Minister of Special Duties, Mr. Michael Aondoakaa, over the latter’s statement about her considered to be libellous.

Prof Dora Akunyili

A letter written by KOP Odidika, principal partner of Sower & Messuarius Solicitors, dated February 11, 2010, said that Aondoakaa’s explanation on the statement he made about Akunyili “begged the issue.”

The letter said that by saying, “what she is trying to do is self-seeking: let her go and confront herself with what happened in NAFDAC,” Aondoakaa obviously libelled Akunyili.

It said that ever since Aondoakaa made the statement, Akunyili has been inundated with telephone calls from people who think that there was something she did wrong when she was director general of the National Agency for Food, Drugs Administration and Control (NAFDAC).

Akunyili’s lawyers, therefore, demanded a clear apology from Aondoakaa, within seven days, to be published prominently in the media.

They said failure to do this would leave them with no alternative than to press charges against Aondoakaa. The letter, entitled: “Libellous publication against Prof Dora N. Akunyili,” reads: “We are the solicitors to Prof Dora N. Akunyili, on whose behalf and instruction we write to you in connection with the above subject matter. It is our instruction that you issued a statement, which was published on Monday the 8th of February 2010 in a widely circulating national newspaper, The Nation, wherein you said, inter alia: “Bringing the memo to Federal Executive Council is just to make herself an angel.

She wants to be seen as populist. Whatever she wants from it is still personal. None of the FEC members has disrespect to the Vice-President. As far as we are concerned, the VP is our leader and he is leading us. What she is trying to do is self-seeking: let her go and confront herself with what happened in NAFDAC”.

“Our client has been inundated with telephone calls and personal enquiries from numerous people about your said statement concerning the implication that she did something wrong while she was the Director General of NAFDAC. She duly informed you of these enquiries and demanded, by her letter to you, dated February 8, 2010, that you confirm the authenticity of the authorship of the statement and if confirmed to supply full particulars of your allegations of her misdeeds in NAFDAC to which you alluded.

“By your letter of February 9, 2010 addressed to our client, you admitted making the statement but most disingenuously tried to put a spin on an otherwise clear and unambiguous statement that has only one interpretation, to wit: that our client committed some untoward acts while at the helm of affairs in NAFDAC.

“There is no doubt that as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, you are presumed to be conversant with not only legal matters but with English Language as well. Whilst one can concede your privilege to use any language, no matter how crude and unbecoming of a lawyer and public servant, in your private home and office, same should be tempered and civilized when describing and referring to another person.

“More regrettable is the fact that your libellous publication was against our client whose integrity has been unimpeachable. Her tenure at NAFDAC can accurately be described as the golden years of that establishment as no other head, whether prior to, or subsequent to her appointment, has achieved so much as to even merit comparison with her.

“Our client, therefore, finds it totally unacceptable that her peers and generality of Nigerians have begun to question her integrity and now consider her a disreputable person because of the statement you made. Your said letter of February 9, 2010, therefore, begs the issue.

“We hereby demand that you issue a clear apology to our client and cause the said apology to be published prominently in the media, including The Nation newspaper. Please take notice that unless this demand is met within seven days from the date hereof we shall commence legal proceedings, against you to compel obedience and seek financial compensation for the injury done to our client’s reputation.”

It will be recalled that Aondoakaa, in letter dated February 9, 2010 to Akunyili, said although he was misquoted, his statement was a compliment. His letter to Akunyili said: I wish to draw your attention to the above subject matter conveyed to me by your letter dated 8th February 2010.

“While much of the quoted words in your letter can rightly be ascribed to me, the impact of the last sentence to the effect that “…Let her go and confront herself with what happened in NAFDAC” was meant to be in the positive but was wrongly presented in the negative.

“The correct impact of the above words that the Hon Minister had already earned a reputation for herself while at NAFDAC and needs not seek to do more by embarking on the present course of action to the detriment of a resolution already adopted unanimously by members of the FEC.

“Accept the assurances of my highest regards and consideration.”