Chief Afe Babalola Vs Dele Farotimi And The Cobra Effect of Criminalizing Free Speech.

(Dr Ope Banwo, Founder Of Naija Lives Matter discussed Why Chief Afe Babalola should not Have Made His Libel Case against Dele Farotimi A Criminal One)

Chief Afe Babalola’s decision to pursue criminal charges against Dele Farotimi over alleged defamation has sparked widespread debate, not only about the law but also about its unintended consequences. This case has turned into a classic example of the cobra effect, a term used to describe how an attempted solution to a problem ends up exacerbating it. In this instance, Chief Afe’s actions have amplified public distrust in the judiciary, further entrenched suspicions of corruption, and created an unwinnable battle of perception.

What Is the Cobra Effect?

For those who may not be familiar with this term, The cobra effect originates from a historical anecdote in colonial India, where a bounty was offered for dead cobras to control their population. People were paid for every cobra they killed and presented to the govt. Instead of solving the problem, people began breeding cobras, which they then kill to collect the reward, ultimately worsening the issue.

The term ‘Cobra Effect’ now refers to any situation where the solution to a problem inadvertently makes the problem worse.

In the case of Chief Afe, his attempt to defend his reputation and suppress criticism has not only backfired but also created a series of unexpected outcomes that now undermine his original goals.

The Cobra Effect in Chief Afe’s Attempt to Criminalize Dele Farotimi For His Speech

1. Public Distrust of the Judiciary

By choosing to criminalize speech, Chief Afe has unwittingly become a symbol of what many perceive as the misuse of the justice system to protect the powerful. The judiciary’s integrity was already under scrutiny, with prominent figures—including Supreme Court justices—acknowledging systemic corruption in several cases. In fact the entire members of the Supreme Court once wrote a petition against the Chief Justice, the head of the judiciary himself accusing him of corruption among many other things.

Now, his case reinforces the narrative that the judiciary is inaccessible to ordinary people and easily manipulated by elites.

• If Chief Afe Wins in Court:

A victory would likely be seen as confirmation that corruption exists in the judiciary, as the public may believe the case was decided in his favor due to influence rather than merit. This feeling is already being reinforced with the untidy way Dele Farotimi was abducted from lagos without following proper police procedures for arresting a suspect wanted in another state . Add to this the fact that Ekiti state itself does not even have criminal defamation on its statute books anymore since 2021 .

• If Chief Afe Loses in Court:

A loss will validate Dele’s allegations in the eyes of the public, reinforcing perceptions that the judiciary is corrupt and incapable of protecting its own credibility.

2. Criminalization of Free Speech

What started as a defamation dispute has now escalated into a referendum on free speech. Chief Afe’s choice to pursue criminal charges instead of civil litigation has created a dangerous precedent, turning his case into a rallying cry for those who view it as an attack on dissent and public accountability.

3. Unintended Legacy

Regardless of the outcome, this case will forever be tied to Chief Afe’s legacy. A revered elder and legal icon, he now risks being remembered as the figure who inadvertently became the face of suppressing free speech and defending a compromised judiciary.

• A Cottage Industry of Discontent:

His actions have galvanized critics and spawned a growing movement of discontent, fueled by activists and individuals with their own agendas. This case is no longer just about Chief Afe or Dele Farotimi—it has become a symbol of systemic flaws and the erosion of democratic values.

4. Procedural Missteps

The police’s decision to abduct Dele from Lagos and transport him to Ekiti, bypassing proper rendition procedures, has added another layer of controversy. These actions have reinforced public perceptions of abuse of power and disregard for due process, further undermining the legitimacy of Chief Afe’s case.

5. Perception in a Low-Trust Environment

In a country where trust in institutions is already fragile, Chief Afe’s approach has exacerbated skepticism. The timing, context, and steps taken have triggered a spiral of negative perceptions. Even well-meaning actions are being interpreted as calculated attempts to suppress dissent and shield corruption.

Why Criminalizing Speech Was the Wrong Move

Chief Afe had alternative options. A civil defamation suit would have allowed him to defend his reputation without criminalizing speech or raising questions about his motives. By opting for criminal charges, he has:

• Elevated the stakes unnecessarily, drawing national and international attention.

• Strengthened Dele’s position as a champion of free speech.

• Created an unwinnable perception battle where both outcomes—victory or loss—damage his legacy.

Lessons from the Cobra Effect

The cobra effect teaches us that solutions must be carefully designed with foresight, especially in environments where trust is low. Timing, context, and approach are critical. In this case, Chief Afe’s choice of escalation has:

• Shifted focus from the original dispute to broader issues of free speech and judicial integrity.

• Amplified criticism of the judiciary and its perceived corruption.

• Created a lasting association between Chief Afe and the suppression of dissent.

Conclusion: A Pyrrhic Battle for the aggrieved Chief Afe Babalola

Chief Afe Babalola’s case against Dele Farotimi is no longer about defamation. It has become a cautionary tale about the dangers of criminalizing speech in a low-trust environment. The cobra effect of his actions ensures that, win or lose, his reputation will bear the weight of this episode.

For Chief Afe Babalola, the battle is no longer legal but symbolic—a fight he cannot truly win. His steps have turned a personal grievance into a national debate on free speech, power, and the judiciary, ensuring that his actions will be analyzed, criticized, and remembered long after the case concludes.

Every Nigerian life must matter. Both the aggrieved and the alleged defamer

My name is Ope Banwo, Founder of Naija Lives Matter, and we shall continue to monitor this case to ensure that both the accuser and the  accused get fair hearing and protection under the law