WikkiTimes Media & Publishing Ltd, publishers of WikkiTimes, has filed an appeal against a Bauchi State High Court judgment which awarded N105 million in damages to a mining company and two individuals.
The judgment, delivered on 3 December 2025 by Justice A. L. Kabir of High Court No. 7 in Bauchi, held WikkiTimes and two associates—Haruna Babale and Yakubu Muhammad—liable in a suit filed by Min Xin Mineral Separation Nigeria Limited, Ali Arzuka, and Ibrahim Usman Adam.
The court awarded the respondents N105 million in general damages and N5 million as costs of action.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, WikkiTimes filed a notice of appeal before the Court of Appeal, Jos Division, on 4 December 2025. The appellants, represented by their counsel, Barrister S. G. Idrees, argued that the trial court erred in its evaluation of evidence presented during the proceedings.
In the notice of appeal, the appellants contend that the trial judge failed to consider evidence tendered by WikkiTimes and its witnesses properly and relied disproportionately on the testimonies of the respondents while disregarding the defence’s submissions. They are asking the appellate court to set aside the decision.
WikkiTimes counsel speaks
Speaking to WikkiTimes after filing the appeal, Barrister S. G. Idrees said the legal team had filed a preliminary notice while awaiting the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment, which is necessary to finalise WikkiTimes’ grounds of appeal.
Read Also: WikkiTimes secures global protection as Nigeria’s first member of Reporters Shield Network
“We have given notice of appeal, considering we’re yet to obtain the record,” he said. “We just got a copy of the judgment, not even a Certified True Copy, pending corrections by the court. When we receive the CTC, we will determine the specific grounds of appeal. What we did today is the general ground of appeal.”
Barrister Idrees argued that the High Court misdirected itself by finding that the plaintiffs had proved their case, merely because the publication was tendered in court and the publication came from the Defendants.
“The mere fact that we published a story and they tendered it before the court doesn’t make it defamatory,” he said. “Defamation will arise if all the issues have no basis or justification. We tendered audio evidence, but the court didn’t consider it. The audio is the source of why the publication was made in the first place, where one of the parties admitted that they met the mother of Dogo Gide, and because of that, they were able to access the mining site.”
- G Idrees added that this detail was crucial because “it is a known fact that her son, Dogo Gide, is a known terrorist. So, if they only accessed the mining site after meeting her to make an arrangement to be able to mine, it raises questions and concerns.”
The counsel maintained that the plaintiffs did not prove their case and that “even if they tendered a publication before the court, there is a justification for the publication.”
Mr Idrees further faulted the award of damages.
“We believe there is no justification for awarding N100 million, and on the cost of action, which the court fixed at N5 million; the plaintiffs didn’t tender a single document showing they incurred such cost. All these will constitute our grounds of appeal once we obtain the CTC,” he said.
Background
The case stems from an investigative report published by WikkiTimes in September 2023, which linked Min Xin Mineral Separation Nigeria Limited and two individuals to illegal mining activities and alleged ties with a faction of the armed group led by terrorist kingpin Dogo Gide in Shiroro Local Government Area of Niger State.
The publication examined alleged irregularities involving Chinese-linked mining companies operating under licences belonging to Eso Terra Investment Limited and Majelo Global Resources Limited. WikkiTimes said the report was based on field investigations into insecurity affecting mining communities.
However, the High Court ruled that both the report and an accompanying photograph—said to depict the plaintiffs alongside Dogo Gide—were “false, malicious, and defamatory.”
The court ordered WikkiTimes to retract the story and publish apologies on its website, in three national newspapers, including Daily Trust, and in two internationally circulating magazines. It also directed the removal of all related content from the internet and barred future publication of similar material.
WikkiTimes’ publisher, Haruna Muhammad Salisu, acknowledged the ruling but insisted the organisation “strongly disagrees with the characterization of our investigative work as ‘defamatory’.”
He said the publication was produced “in good faith, guided by public interest, and grounded in ethical field investigations.”
Mr Salisu described the judgment as a sobering reminder of the pressures confronting independent newsrooms in Nigeria.
He noted its personal impact, coming on the morning he was scheduled to defend his thesis proposal, which he said partly examines “the pressures small newsrooms face while holding power accountable.”
“Despite these challenges, WikkiTimes remains steadfast in its mission,” he added. “We will continue to uphold our responsibility to hold power to account and to serve the public with courage, integrity, and commitment.”
The matter, filed initially as Suit No. BA/205/2023 now awaits review by the Court of Appeal, which will consider the evidence and arguments from both sides.
Comments are closed.