Fresh controversy has erupted around the Presidency after activist lawyer Marshal Abubakar called for sanctions against presidential spokesman Bayo Onanuga over remarks linking social media activist Martins Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), to an alleged fake audio involving President Bola Tinubu.
The dispute emerged following circulation of a viral audio clip purportedly featuring President Tinubu making controversial comments about insecurity in the South-East, World Bank loans, and the 2027 elections.
The Presidency later described the recording as fake and allegedly manipulated using artificial intelligence technology.
Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, reacted publicly on X by calling for legal action against VDM, accusing him of disseminating the alleged fake audio online.
“This VDM needs to face the weight of the law,” Onanuga wrote while describing the circulation of the audio as “an egregious abuse of the social media platform.”
However, subsequent reports suggested that the manipulated audio circulating online may not have originated directly from VDM’s verified social media accounts.
Premium Times reported that unidentified individuals allegedly extracted footage from one of the activist’s videos and inserted AI-generated voice content resembling President Tinubu’s voice before circulating the altered version online.
Following the controversy, lawyer Marshal Abubakar accused Onanuga of spreading falsehood and making inflammatory statements capable of damaging both the Presidency’s credibility and public trust.
In a statement shared with journalists, Abubakar argued that the presidential aide acted recklessly by allegedly linking VDM to manipulated content without proper verification.
He insisted that public officials occupying sensitive communication positions must exercise greater caution before making accusations capable of influencing public perception.
The lawyer further demanded that the Presidency publicly distance itself from Onanuga’s comments and impose appropriate sanctions against him for allegedly embarrassing the government through dissemination of inaccurate claims.
Abubakar additionally framed the matter as a broader issue involving freedom of expression and the rights of Nigerians to criticise government policies without intimidation.
According to him, attempts to criminalise criticism or dissent could undermine democratic principles and constitutional protections surrounding free speech in Nigeria.
The lawyer referenced several judicial precedents supporting freedom of expression, including earlier Nigerian court decisions affirming citizens’ rights to peaceful criticism and political dissent.
Meanwhile, VDM, through his lawyers at Deji Adeyanju & Partners, also rejected the Presidency’s allegations, arguing that a simple verification of his official social media pages would have shown that he neither created nor shared the controversial audio clip.
The activist’s legal team accused influential government figures of rushing to conclusions and attempting to discredit him because of his criticism of the Tinubu administration.
Observers say the controversy reflects growing tensions between Nigerian authorities and social media activists who increasingly shape political conversations online.
VDM has become one of Nigeria’s most controversial digital influencers, frequently involved in public disputes involving politicians, celebrities, institutions, and government agencies.
Political analysts believe the latest dispute additionally highlights the growing challenge posed by AI-generated misinformation and digitally manipulated political content across modern democracies.
Deepfake technology has become increasingly sophisticated globally, making it more difficult for citizens and institutions to distinguish authentic recordings from fabricated media.
Recent academic research has warned that AI-generated audio may significantly erode public trust in authentic speech and political communication.
Observers note that Nigeria has experienced rising concern over misinformation, manipulated media, and politically motivated digital propaganda, especially as political activity ahead of the 2027 elections intensifies nationwide.
The Presidency itself had earlier warned Nigerians against the dangers of fake AI-generated audio and video materials capable of misleading the public and destabilising political discourse.
However, critics now argue that the government must apply the same standards of verification and restraint when responding publicly to controversial online content.
The controversy also reflects broader debates regarding state response to digital activism, online criticism, and regulation of social media content within Nigeria’s democratic environment.
Analysts say tensions between political authorities and social media influencers have intensified significantly over the past few years as online platforms increasingly shape public opinion, activism, and political accountability.
The issue may also reignite conversations surrounding cybercrime laws, digital rights, and the boundaries between combating misinformation and protecting free expression.
Observers believe public trust could become increasingly fragile if government officials, influencers, and political actors continue exchanging accusations over manipulated content without transparent verification mechanisms.
Meanwhile, no official indication had emerged at the time of reporting suggesting that the Presidency intended to sanction Onanuga over the controversy.
Political observers note that the dispute comes at a sensitive period for the Tinubu administration as economic hardship, political realignments, and opposition coalition activities continue dominating national discourse ahead of the 2027 elections.
Analysts additionally warn that misinformation controversies involving AI-generated media may become even more common as Nigeria moves closer to another major election cycle.
The development reinforces growing concerns regarding how governments, institutions, journalists, and citizens may navigate the rapidly evolving challenge of digital manipulation in modern political communication.
For now, the clash involving VDM, Bayo Onanuga, and the Presidency has evolved beyond a simple online dispute into a wider debate surrounding misinformation, free speech, digital accountability, and political communication in Nigeria’s increasingly polarized media environment.
As questions continue over verification, responsibility, and public trust, the controversy may further shape discussions around AI-generated political content and government communication strategies ahead of the 2027 elections.