Social Media Influencer Declines to Testify in Alleged EFCC Bribery Case

On September 30, 2024, social media critic Martins Vincent Otse, widely recognized by his online alias VeryDarkMan (VDM), refused to give testimony against officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Haliru Nababa, the controller-general of the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCoS). This development occurred when he appeared before the House of Representatives joint committee on financial crimes and reformatory institutions.

The lawmakers had summoned VDM following a video he released involving allegations by Idris Okuneye, known popularly as Bobrisky. Bobrisky claimed to have bribed EFCC officials to dismiss charges of money laundering against him.

In the contentious video, Bobrisky also alleged that he did not serve his six-month prison sentence within the confines of the Nigerian Correctional Service, hinting instead at covert arrangements involving a private apartment.

During the session with the House committee, VDM declined to proceed with his testimony due to Bobrisky’s absence at the hearing. “If I say anything, let me die,” VDM stated, dressed in traditional attire and accompanied by his legal adviser, Deji Adeyanju.

The influencer was expected to detail accusations that Bobrisky had offered a bribe of N15 million to EFCC officials. Ola Olukoyode, chairman of the EFCC, was represented by his chief of staff, Michael Nzekwe, while Haliru Nababa appeared in person. Bobrisky’s absence, however, derailed the proceedings.

Bobrisky, who had been convicted for abusing the naira and reportedly served a shortened sentence, did so allegedly at a private location facilitated by his “godfather” and Haliru Nababa.

Bobrisky’s legal representative, Avwerosuoghene Omuvwie, attended the hearing, but the influencer’s nonappearance led VDM to withhold his testimony. “I will not speak until Bobrisky is here,” VDM declared, inciting some lawmakers to call for his detainment over potential perjury violations.

Despite mounting pressure from the committee, Adeyanju, VDM’s lawyer, confirmed that the presence of Bobrisky was essential for testimony, saying, “Bob must be here for us to present the evidence.” Faced with these challenges, VDM declined further participation and engaged in private discussions with his counsel.