✍️✍️✍️✍️✍️Olajengbesi OS
As a legal enthusiast committed to upholding truth, justice, and the rule of law, I feel compelled to address the recent arrest of social media influencer and activist Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM).
The incident has ignited widespread discourse, particularly across social media platforms.
Unfortunately, much of this discussion has been clouded by misinformation, emotional outbursts, and unfair attacks directed at Guaranty Trust Bank (GTB), where the arrest reportedly occurred.
According to credible reports, VDM was arrested on May 2, 2025, The arrest stems from allegations of cyberstalking, based on multiple petitions submitted by various complainants—a fact that has been confirmed by the EFCC.
It should be noted there’s all probability of invite been sent to VDM which he probably as failed to honored which amount to the need to secure a warrant
Thus I find it necessary to address the accusations against GTB, which have stirred public outrage and even led to calls for a boycott.
Claims suggesting that GTB was complicit in VDM’s arrest by detaining him inside an exit door for over five minutes are, in my view, speculative at best and misleading at worst.
From a legal standpoint, if a valid warrant was presented, GTB’s cooperation with law enforcement would not only be lawful but also mandatory. Failure to assist could constitute obstruction of justice under Nigerian law—a serious offense. It is therefore misguided to vilify GTB for fulfilling a legal obligation. Doing so undermines the foundational principle that no individual or entity is above the law and that due process must be respected.
Thus we should all understand that
the role of Guaranty Trust Bank in the arrest of VeryDarkMan appears, based on available evidence, to be minimal and legally compliant. Without concrete proof of complicity or misconduct, blaming the bank is both unjust and distracting. GTB’s cooperation with law enforcement, in response to a valid court warrant, aligns with its legal obligations—not an act of betrayal or partisanship. Redirecting public outrage toward the bank undermines the principle of due process l
I understand the passion and our concerns surrounding freedom of expression. However, it is vital to distinguish legal facts from emotional sentiment. The EFCC has made it clear that VDM’s arrest is related to specific cyberstalking allegations, not his public criticism of GTB. The agency has also assured the public that VDM will be released once bail conditions are met and that the matter will proceed through the proper judicial channels.
we must not lose sight of what truly matters: a society governed by the rule of law, where accountability applies equally to individuals, corporations, and government agencies. While emotional reactions are natural, they must not eclipse our collective commitment to truth and justice.
