No Petition, No Justification: Growing Outrage Over VeryDarkMan’s Detention by EFCC

The unrelenting drama surrounding the arrest of outspoken Nigerian social media activist, Martins Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), has taken a dramatic turn, sparking nationwide outrage and drawing fierce criticism from legal minds, civil society groups, and social media users. On Monday, human rights lawyer Deji Adeyanju revealed after a visit to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) headquarters in Abuja that the agency has not received any formal petition against the controversial activist, raising serious questions about the legality of his detention and the troubling pattern of arbitrary state action in Nigeria.

Adeyanju, who also serves as Otse’s legal counsel, did not mince words when he called out the EFCC for holding his client without justification. “Got into the country this evening and went straight to VDM at EFCC. Just left him,” the lawyer wrote on social media, sounding alarm bells over what he described as an unjustifiable arrest. “We still cannot understand why he was arrested. EFCC said there’s no petition against him after our repeated demand.” The activist, widely known for his often unfiltered commentary on societal issues and public figures, was reportedly picked up by EFCC operatives at a Guarantee Trust Bank in Abuja, without a warrant and without any prior notice.

The silence from the EFCC has only amplified suspicions and frustrations. With no official statement issued to clarify the situation, a storm of condemnation has erupted online and offline. The hashtag #FreeVDM began trending across social media platforms shortly after news of the arrest broke, as Nigerians from all walks of life demanded answers and accountability. For many, this incident is symptomatic of a broader pattern where state institutions wield power in ways that appear to suppress dissent rather than promote justice.

Among the loudest voices in the clamor for justice is the Public Interest Lawyers League (PILL), a legal advocacy group that did not hold back in its rebuke of the anti-graft agency. In a strongly worded statement, PILL President Abdul Mahmud Esq described the arrest and continued detention of Otse as a “flagrant abuse of constitutional rights” and a stark example of “growing disregard for constitutional safeguards that protect Nigerian citizens from arbitrary state action.”

PILL pointedly cited Section 35 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees the right to personal liberty and stipulates that no person shall be deprived of their freedom except in accordance with a procedure permitted by law. Mahmud criticized the EFCC for failing to charge Otse to court within the constitutionally mandated time frame of 24 to 48 hours. He argued that Otse’s detention without a warrant, without explanation, and without immediate judicial oversight, represents a gross violation of Nigeria’s democratic principles and international human rights obligations.

“It is unacceptable for any agency of state to act outside the law in its pursuit of alleged wrongdoers,” Mahmud asserted, stressing that the manner in which the arrest was conducted—secretive, warrantless, and without transparency—set a dangerous precedent. “The Constitution was not made to be selectively obeyed,” he added. His warning was unequivocal: Nigeria risks sliding further into authoritarianism if state institutions are allowed to operate without checks and balances.

The implications of this saga go beyond one man’s detention. Otse, though a controversial figure, has gained a large following by tackling societal issues with raw honesty and defiant energy. His critics accuse him of sensationalism, while his supporters applaud him as a fearless voice for the voiceless. Whichever side of the divide one falls on, the consensus is clear—his arrest without due process is unacceptable in any democracy that claims to respect the rule of law.

Deji Adeyanju, himself no stranger to political resistance and state pressure, was emphatic in his call for Otse’s immediate release. He labeled the arrest as “arbitrary detention” and warned that the EFCC’s actions reflect a broader trend of silencing dissenting voices under the guise of enforcing the law. “We are watching the EFCC very closely,” Adeyanju said. “We will not allow this to stand.”

The silence from the EFCC has only served to deepen suspicions. Many Nigerians are now demanding more than just the release of Otse—they are calling for a full investigation into the agency’s procedures and its apparent willingness to sidestep constitutional mandates in the pursuit of supposed justice. In a nation where public trust in institutions is already fragile, such actions only serve to widen the chasm between the people and those in power.

The outrage is not just legal—it is deeply emotional. For a country with a painful history of military rule, state intimidation, and suppression of dissent, events like these evoke dark memories. Citizens fear that the hard-won freedoms of democracy are slowly being eroded under the guise of national interest or institutional duty. Civil society groups are warning that the weaponization of state power against critics, especially in a digital age where voices like Otse’s thrive online, poses a grave threat to the nation’s democratic experiment.

As the days go by and the EFCC continues to keep mum on the matter, the pressure is mounting. Legal experts, civil rights advocates, and everyday Nigerians are united in their demand for justice, transparency, and above all, respect for the rule of law. The continued detention of VeryDarkMan without a charge or explanation is more than a legal misstep—it is a direct challenge to the constitutional framework that binds Nigeria as a democratic state.

If there is indeed no petition against Otse, as confirmed by his lawyer, then his detention is not only illegal but deeply troubling. It is a clarion call for a national conversation about the role of the EFCC and other state institutions in a democratic society. Are they protectors of justice or instruments of suppression? Are they accountable to the people or above the law? These are questions that the EFCC must now answer—not just to the lawyers or to Otse, but to every Nigerian who believes in justice, fairness, and freedom.