A Nigeria businessman, Aare Bashiru Fakorede has demanded the immediate retraction of publications accusing him of orchestrating violence, deploying thugs, manipulating Police officers and participating in an alleged attempt to frame members of the Ojaekomo Family for possession of firearms.
Fakorede’s demand was contained in a ‘cease-and-desist’ letter dated August 24, 2026, written on his behalf by his lawyer, Elvis E. Asia, and addressed to the Center for Public Accountability and Social Well-Being (CPASW), Shaffykay & Co. Property Limited and named members of the Ojaekomo Family.
In the letter, Fakorede gave the recipients 48 hours from receipt to withdraw the allegations, publish an apology and undertake not to repeat or republish them, failing which he would commence legal proceedings for defamation.
The dispute followed a press statement issued under the name of CPASW on or about August 19, 2026, in which Fakorede was accused of “spearheading, orchestrating and executing” attacks on disputed land, deploying thugs and causing members of the Ojaekomo Family to be arrested on alleged trumped-up charges.
The statement also alleged that Fakorede had adopted a “modus operandi” of framing members of the family for possession of firearms and accused him of involvement in attacks and the demolition of buildings on the property.
The allegations were subsequently reported by The Guardian Nigeria in an August 19 article titled, “Ojaekomo Family Again Raises Alarm Over Alleged Attacks on Lagos-Allocated Land, Calls for Police Intervention,” with similar reports appearing on other media and online platforms.
Fakorede, through his lawyer, categorically denied the allegations, describing them as false, grave and unjustified.
Fakorede’s lawyer, Asia said a significant fact omitted from the publications was that Fakorede was neither a party to the litigation concerning the land nor a beneficiary of the property in dispute, and claimed no proprietary or beneficial interest in it. According to the lawyer, the publications had nevertheless portrayed Fakorede as the principal actor in a dispute between other persons and attributed to him allegations of serious criminal conduct.
Lawyer cites court record: Giving the background to the dispute, Asia said Shaffykay & Co. Property Limited commenced Suit No. LD/1079OLMW/2021 in respect of 60.223 hectares of reclaimable water at Oju-Olokun.
According to the letter, Shaffykay’s claim was founded on a Reclamation/Sand Filling Agreement allegedly entered into with members of the Ojaekomo Family, pursuant to which it sought, among other reliefs, possession of the property and an assignment of 30 hectares.
Alhaji Yekini Bakare and Oba Tijani Akinloye, the Ojomu of Ajiran, were joined as the 7th and 8th Defendants, representing the Ojomu Family. They disputed the claim and counterclaimed for a declaration that the Ojomu Family owned all the land at Oju-Olokun, that Shaffykay was a trespasser and for damages for trespass.
The letter stated that following the conclusion of Case Management Conference, the matter was transferred for reassignment in February 2023. The Ojomu representatives were thereafter not served with hearing notices of the subsequent proceedings.
In their absence, Shaffykay discontinued its claim against them, their names were struck out, and Shaffykay proceeded to enter into Terms of Settlement with the Ojaekomo Defendants. The Terms were made the Consent Judgment of the Court on April 2, 2026, and subsequently amended on April 23, 2026, following which the judgment was executed and possession was purportedly taken.
According to the letter, the Ojomu representatives subsequently challenged the proceedings. The Court examined its record and found no evidence that hearing notices had been issued or served on them or their counsel before the relevant proceedings.
The Court consequently held that the proceedings conducted in their absence violated their constitutional right to fair hearing and were conducted without jurisdiction.
By its Ruling of July 9, 2026, the Court set aside the relevant April proceedings, restored the Ojomu representatives as Defendants and Counterclaimants, set aside the Consent Judgment, declared its execution null and void, set aside the possession taken pursuant to it and also set aside the Writ of Possession.
The Ruling did not determine the competing claims to ultimate ownership of the property, which remain for determination in the substantive proceedings.
Against that background, Asia argued that the account presented in the publications was materially different from the history disclosed by the court record.
“The true history of the dispute is materially different from the narrative presented in your publications,” the lawyer stated.
‘What status quo are you seeking to preserve?’ Fakorede’s lawyer also rejected the contention that an appeal and application for stay preserved Shaffykay’s possession of the property under the principle of “status quo ante bellum.”
He argued that merely filing an appeal or application for stay did not reverse the July 9 Ruling, particularly as the Court had already set aside the Consent Judgment, its execution, the possession obtained pursuant to it and the Writ of Possession.
“One therefore wonders precisely what ‘status quo’ you claim a right to preserve,” the letter stated.
According to Asia, the relevant status quo could only be the state of possession before enforcement of the now set-aside Consent Judgment and not possession obtained through an execution subsequently declared null and void and set aside by the Court.
Fakorede challenges firearms allegation: The lawyer particularly challenged the allegation that Fakorede attempted to frame members of the Ojaekomo Family with firearms, describing it as a specific and objectively verifiable allegation which his client said never occurred.
The CPASW publication had alleged that members of the Ojaekomo Family were arrested and taken to a Police Command where “strange firearms” were produced and attributed to them, before an unnamed senior Police officer allegedly intervened.
Fakorede’s lawyer demanded that those behind the allegation identify the persons allegedly framed, the date and place of the incident, the Police formation and officers involved, particulars of the firearms allegedly produced, the basis for linking Fakorede to them and the identity of the unnamed senior Police officer said to have intervened.
“An accusation of this gravity cannot responsibly be made through press statements and then concealed behind unnamed officers and unspecified sources,” Asia said.
48-hour ultimatum: The letter demanded that CPASW, Shaffykay and the named members of the Ojaekomo Family immediately cease further publication of the allegations, withdraw the existing publications and issue a clear and unqualified retraction and apology.
It also demanded that any retraction be given no less prominence than the original publications and communicated to The Guardian Nigeria and other media organisations to which the allegations had been supplied.
The recipients were further asked to provide evidence supporting the firearms allegation, disclose CPASW’s legal and registration particulars, give a written undertaking against further publication and preserve documents and electronic records relating to the preparation and dissemination of the statements.
Fakorede warned that failure to comply within 48 hours of receipt of the letter would result in legal proceedings against those responsible for the publications, with claims for substantial damages for defamation, aggravated damages where appropriate, injunctive and mandatory reliefs and costs.
The letter added that he reserved his rights against every author, source, sponsor and publisher of the allegations, including anyone who continues to circulate them after being placed on notice of their alleged falsity.
Asia maintained that his client would not allow his reputation to become collateral damage in a dispute to which he is not a party, adding:
“Litigation is determined by evidence and law before the Court, not by who succeeds in creating the loudest or most damaging narrative in the media,” the lawyer stated
