The Human and Environmental Development Agenda (HEDA Resource Centre) has welcomed the judgment of the Federal High Court dismissing the libel suit filed by its Chairman, Olanrewaju Suraju, against former Attorney-General of the Federation, Mohammed Bello Adoke, over allegations linked to the OPL 245 case. In a statement issued and signed by HEDA’s Chairman, Olanrewaju Suraju, the civil society organization described the ruling as “no victory for Adoke,” noting that the court did not affirm the substance of the forgery allegations contained in his petition to the police. According to synchronised media reports emerging from the stable of The Cable online platform, the court dismissed the suit on the ground that Suraju was not expressly named in Adoke’s petition requesting an investigation into alleged forgery of materials used in proceedings in Milan and London. The court held that because Suraju’s name did not appear in the petition, the legal ingredients required to establish defamation were not satisfied. Reacting to the decision, HEDA stated that it welcomes the judgment, emphasising that the court did not embarrass itself by ruling that Adoke’s fantasies of forgery were truthful, even though Adoke had tried to make that argument before the Nigerian Police – despite the email having clearly emanated, as affirmed by the London Metropolitan Police, from an email account of his crony Abubakar Aliyu. The group further stressed that the ruling was based strictly on technical considerations relating to naming and identification, not on validation of the allegations. HEDA further maintained that Adoke in his Motion of Notice denied his frivolous and concocted allegations that Mr. Suraju and HEDA forged the RAI tape and the agroupproperties email. Instead, he argued that he never identified Lanre by name in the Petition to the Police, the implication presumably being that a person who is not named cannot suffer defamation and further dissociated himself from his own handwritten adoption statement with the police to the contrary. The civil organisation also challenged Adoke to publicly clarify the identity of the individual or individuals he accused in his petition. “The judgment has raised a question for Adoke: are you brave enough to come out into the open?” the statement read, urging him to state clearly who he believes was responsible for the alleged forgery. Meanwhile, contrary to the vain labour of The Cable online platform to rewrite history on the phantom charges preferred against our Chairman being withdrawn on political expediency of the London case, the fact of the matter was that of concocted charges of cybercrime hurriedly and poorly put together by “fantastically corrupt” immediate past Attorney General, Abubakar Malami, who David Cameron must have had in mind when describing Nigeria in that ignoble terms, in collaboration with a desperate Adoke and some corrupted police officers, contrary to Adoke’s forgery allegation in his petition. “The impressive defence legal team of Mr. Suraju led my Dr. Muiz Banire SAN put forward a robust defence, including the subpoena of Adoke and Malami as witness, leading to Malami and Adoke running tail in limbs to withdraw the charges.” the statement added. Reaffirming its commitment to transparency and accountability, HEDA stated that the dismissal of the suit does not alter its long-standing position on the OPL 245 transaction or its broader anti-corruption advocacy. The organisation pledged to continue defending its integrity and to pursue all lawful avenues in the public interest.