By Adenike Ajanlekoko
A healthy democracy depends not only on the freedom to speak but also on the responsibility to speak truthfully. Public discourse flourishes when opinions are grounded in facts, fairness and respect for the rule of law.
In today’s digital age, where social media has transformed virtually everyone with a large following into an opinion shaper, the influence of public personalities has never been greater.
Yet, with that influence comes an equally significant obligation to ensure that public statements do not mislead citizens, undermine institutions or unjustly tarnish the reputation of individuals.
Recent comments made during an interview on Arise Television concerning Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Jimoh Moshood Olohundare, have once again highlighted the importance of accuracy and restraint when discussing criminal investigations and the administration of justice.
One particular assertion, that someone could simply “pin murder on a man you are dragging land with” deserves closer examination because it reflects a fundamental misconception of how Nigeria’s criminal justice system operates.
Contrary to such suggestions, no police officer, regardless of rank or influence, possesses the legal authority to declare anyone guilty of a criminal offence.
Criminal justice is not driven by personal opinions or administrative discretion. It is governed by clearly established constitutional and statutory procedures.
When a criminal allegation is made, investigators are expected to gather evidence, interview witnesses, analyse facts and, where necessary, forward the case to prosecutorial authorities for legal review.
Ultimately, it is the courts—not the police—that determine whether an accused person is guilty or innocent after evaluating admissible evidence presented by both the prosecution and the defence.
This distinction is not merely procedural; it lies at the very heart of the rule of law.
Confusing an investigation with a conviction creates a dangerous narrative that unfairly portrays law enforcement officers as having powers they neither possess nor exercise under the Constitution.
It also risks weakening public confidence in institutions that are designed to operate within defined legal boundaries.
Public commentary should therefore distinguish between allegations, investigations and judicial findings. These are three separate stages within the justice system, each governed by different legal standards.
Failing to appreciate these distinctions can create unnecessary public anxiety and foster mistrust in institutions whose legitimacy depends on public confidence.
Equally troubling is the growing tendency to elevate allegations into accepted truths simply because they trend on social media or are repeated during television interviews.
Democracy does not operate on the principle that repetition equals proof.
Every allegation, regardless of who makes it or against whom it is directed, deserves careful scrutiny. Serious accusations against public officials should neither be dismissed outright nor accepted unquestioningly.
Instead, they should be subjected to objective investigation supported by verifiable evidence. Evidence, not popularity, emotion or online influence, remains the cornerstone of justice.
This principle protects everyone.
Today, it may protect a police officer. Tomorrow, it may protect a journalist, an activist, a politician, a businessperson or an ordinary citizen.
The safeguards embedded in due process exist precisely because reputations, careers and lives can be irreparably damaged by unfounded accusations.
The rise of digital platforms has undoubtedly expanded civic participation and strengthened democratic engagement. Citizens now have unprecedented opportunities to hold public officials accountable.
That is a positive development. However, accountability must never be confused with character assassination.
Public figures with substantial online audiences carry enormous persuasive power. Their statements often shape public perception long before facts are independently verified.
A single unsubstantiated allegation amplified across multiple platforms can inflict lasting reputational harm even if subsequent investigations reveal no wrongdoing.
For this reason, influence should be exercised with wisdom, restraint and a commitment to factual accuracy.
Criticism of public institutions is both legitimate and necessary in any democracy. Constructive criticism promotes reform, exposes misconduct and strengthens accountability.
But criticism loses its moral force when it relies on speculation instead of evidence or when it blurs the distinction between suspicion and proof.
If there is credible evidence implicating any public official in criminal misconduct, Nigeria has established institutions empowered by law to investigate, prosecute and secure convictions where appropriate.
Those mechanisms exist precisely to ensure that justice is administered impartially and transparently.
Conversely, where credible evidence is lacking, individuals should not be convicted in the court of public opinion merely because allegations generate headlines or social media engagement.
History has repeatedly demonstrated that public opinion can be wrong. Innocent individuals have often suffered irreversible damage from accusations later found to be baseless.
This is why the presumption of innocence remains one of the most enduring pillars of every democratic legal system.
Our democracy will not be strengthened by sensational commentary, social media trials or public verdicts delivered before investigations are completed.
Rather, it will grow stronger when citizens, opinion leaders, journalists and public officials alike commit themselves to facts, fairness and fidelity to the rule of law.
Freedom of expression is one of democracy’s greatest assets. Yet its true value lies not merely in the freedom to speak, but in the discipline to speak responsibly.
In the final analysis, justice is best served not by the loudest voices, but by credible evidence, impartial institutions and courts of competent jurisdiction.
These enduring principles, not online outrage or televised accusations, must continue to guide Nigeria’s democratic journey.
Adenike Ajanlekoko writes from Festac Town, Lagos State. Email: aydalliance@gmail.com