Wikileaks Cable: Afe Babalola Chambers and Other Prominent Law Firms Are Alleged by US Diplomat to Have Possibly Influenced Plateau State Governor Election for Former President Obasanjo with $225,000

According to the leaked cable, the U.S. Embassy’s Political Counsellor, Russell J. Hanks, alleged that $225,000 was channeled to secure a favorable ruling for the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Joshua Dariye. The funds were purportedly funneled through Babalola’s chambers, enabling the PDP to overturn a judgment that initially nullified Dariye’s victory in the 2003 Plateau State gubernatorial elections. The decision was seen as a critical win for Obasanjo’s administration at the time, given the political tensions in Plateau and its wider implications for control of Nigeria’s Middle Belt region.

The U.S. Cable and the Plateau Gubernatorial Election

The cable mentions Afe Babalola & Co as one of the law firms involved in the case, but it stops short of alleging direct wrongdoing on the part of the firm or its principal, Afe Babalola. Instead, it places the events within a broader commentary on Nigeria’s legal system, which the U.S. Embassy official described as susceptible to political influence. The cable’s contents reflect the subjective observations of U.S. diplomatic personnel at the time, rather than proven facts or legal findings.

Clarifying the Role of Afe Babalola & Co

While the cable references Afe Babalola & Co in connection with the Plateau election case, it is important to note that it does not accuse the firm or its principal of paying or receiving bribes. Rather, it indicates that Babalola’s firm was one of the firms engaged in the legal contest on behalf of one of the litigants.

Given that prominent legal practitioners often represent clients in high-stakes political cases, the mere mention of a law firm in a diplomatic cable should not be interpreted as evidence of wrongdoing. The cable highlights allegations of judicial influence as a systemic issue, rather than singling out any one person or entity as responsible.

Recent Allegations by Dele Farotimi Against Afe Babalola: No Link to the U.S. Cable

Dele Farotimi’s recent allegations against Afe Babalola & Co are unrelated to the 2004 diplomatic cable. In his book, Nigeria and Its Criminal Justice System, Farotimi alleged that Afe Babalola’s chambers “compromised the Supreme Court” in ways that he did not substantiate with evidence. These claims have been categorically denied by Babalola, who maintains that his firm has always acted ethically and with the highest professional standards.

Following these claims, Farotimi was arrested on allegations of defamation and cyberstalking after Babalola’s legal team lodged a petition against him. The charges relate directly to the comments made in Farotimi’s book and have no connection to the contents of the 2004 diplomatic cable.

Afe Babalola versus Dele Farotimi: Social Media Versus  Judicial Evidence 

The WikiLeaks cable will be seized on by Dele Farotimi’s teeming supporters as evidence that corroborates the allegations made against Afe Babalola.

But the cable, as published by WikiLeaks, does not support or corroborate any of the claims made by Farotimi. It does not accuse the firm or its principal of wrongdoing. Instead, it offers the subjective perspective of U.S. diplomatic officials on Nigeria’s legal environment at the time. Similarly, while Dele Farotimi has made allegations against Babalola’s firm, these claims are distinct from and not supported by the content of the diplomatic cable.

Insight from U.S. Intelligence Expert on The US Diplomatic Cable Linking Afe Babalola to the Dariye Case

According to a Nigerian security expert currently engaged with the U.S. government in Washington, the sourcing of information for U.S. diplomatic cables must be understood within the context of intelligence gathering. He explained that such reports often rely on input from multiple sources, including third-party informants who may themselves be on retainer with U.S. embassies.

The US cable in question does not identify the attorney who was purportedly the source of this information. The document also does not suggest that the information was obtained directly from the attorney by Russell J. Hanks. Rather, the information may have come from a third party, which introduces questions about its accuracy and reliability.

The Nigerian security expert, who requested anonymity, emphasised that diplomatic cables are not always definitive or fully accurate. He drew attention to the broader process of U.S. intelligence gathering, pointing out that even reports from high-profile agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) are sometimes flawed.

“It is not every intelligence report coming from even the CIA and U.S. secret services that is correct,” he explained. “A very good example is the intelligence report on Iraq’s nuclear weapons, which turned out to be flawed.”

According to the expert, diplomatic cables—like the one discussing the Plateau election—should be seen as one layer of insight among many, rather than a conclusive statement of fact. The expert noted that diplomatic cables are usually written by embassy officials who rely on reports from local sources, many of whom are informants, analysts, or intermediaries. These sources may not always have direct access to the events they report on.

“To stay relevant, these sources sometimes feed erroneous information into the system,” the expert said. He emphasized that U.S. diplomats are aware of this risk, which is why sensitive information is typically corroborated with multiple independent sources before it is acted upon.

The Dele Farotimi-Afe Babalola Dispute Underscores the Urgent Need for Judicial Reform in Nigeria

As the legal proceedings between Farotimi and Babalola continue, the court will separate evidence-based claims from unsubstantiated assertions.