RE: Egregious Journalistic Malpractice by Ebule Anthony Metsese in Interview with Otse Amorighoye

03/03/25

The Editor

Fresh Angle International

RE: Egregious Journalistic Malpractice by Ebule Anthony Metsese in Interview with Otse Amorighoye

Dear Editor,

As a reader with significant interest in the Itsekiri diaspora community, I feel compelled to address the alarming journalistic failings evident in the interview with Mr. Otse Amorighoye published on February 28, 2025, on your platform, conducted by Ebule Anthony Metsese.

What I witnessed in this interview, was not journalism but rather stenography for one side of a complex legal dispute, with Mr. Metsese abandoning virtually every fundamental principle of journalistic integrity.

Abandonment of Basic Fact-Checking Any journalist worthy of the title would have conducted even minimal research before publishing an interview containing serious allegations about a community organization.

Had Mr. Metsese performed the most rudimentary due diligence, he would have discovered three separate court rulings that directly contradict central claims made in his interview:

1. On November 28, 2022, Judge Pasichow examined and dismissed all allegations of financial misconduct against Ugbajo's leadership, finding that Mr. Amorighoye's associates could provide NO EVIDENCE whatsoever of financial impropriety. When questioned under oath, Toju Etchie acknowledged he had no such evidence.

2. On March 24, 2023, Judge Kravitz validated the legitimate leadership transition within Ugbajo.

3. On December 13, 2024, after an extensive trial, Judge Kravitz ruled that the formation of Mr. Amorighoye's group was "legally invalid and of no legal effect" and ordered his associates to pay $23,000 plus interest for tortious interference.

4. On February 24, 2025-just days before this interview-the court reaffirmed these findings. Yet Mr. Metsese allowed Mr. Amorighoye to repeatedly reference "financial misappropriation" and a "tainted reputation" without challenge, effectively publishing court-rejected claims as if they had merit.

Journalistic Malpractice Through Leading Questions Mr. Metsese's interview represents a textbook example of how not to conduct journalism. His questions were not inquiries but rather vehicles for embedding unverified assertions:

· "What systemic issues in the previous leadership structure led to the decision to create a new, more accountable organization?" (presupposing "systemic issues" existed when courts found none) 1

· "Given that the depletion of previous funds represents a significant loss to the community-public records indicate the former nonprofit once held nearly $180,000, with approximately $100,000 spent on legal fees-what measures is INC-USA implementing...?" (presenting disputed claims as established fact)

· "What specific governance challenges in the previous leadership structure were identified as key factors leading to the split...?" (assuming "governance challenges" existed despite court validation of the original governance structure) These are not neutral questions but rather assertions disguised as questions-a fundamental violation of journalistic ethics.

The $23,000 Question Never Asked Perhaps most egregiously, Mr. Metsese never once asked about the December 13, 2024 judgment ordering Mr. Amorighoye's associates to pay $23,000 plus interest for tortious interference. Even when Mr. Amorighoye discussed financial transparency in Question 8, Mr. Metsese failed to ask how his organization plans to address this legal obligation.

This omission alone demonstrates either profound incompetence or deliberate bias. No journalist with even minimal professional standards would have overlooked this central fact. The interview contains no evidence that Mr. Metsese sought comment from representatives of the legally recognized Ugbajo Itsekiri USA Inc., a fundamental requirement of ethical journalism.

Instead, he allowed Mr. Amorighoye to make unchallenged claims about an organization that courts have repeatedly validated, with no opportunity for response. Potential Legal Exposure While I write as an interested observer rather than a legal advisor, it seems evident that this interview potentially exposes your publication to significant liability for libel:

1. The interview contains multiple statements directly contradicted by court findings

2. These statements were published just days after a court reaffirmed previous rulings

3. The statements impugn the financial integrity and governance of a legally recognized organization

4. By publishing these statements without verification, your publication assumes liability for their content A Failure of Journalistic Purpose Journalism's essential purpose is to inform the public with accurate, balanced information.

Mr. Metsese has instead produced a piece that misinforms your readers about matters already adjudicated in court, presents one side of a complex dispute without challenge, and fails to include the most relevant facts about the legal status of the organizations discussed.

This is not a matter of political perspective or editorial judgment-it is a fundamental failure to adhere to the most basic standards of the journalistic profession.

2 I share these observations not to advocate for any particular outcome, but rather as someone who values journalistic integrity and factual reporting, particularly on matters that affect community organizations.

Sincerely,

Bawo Ogbobine

Atlanta, GA.

Colin_bine@yahoo.com

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT: COURT RULINGS AFFIRM UGBAJO ITSEKIRI USA INC.'S LEGITIMACY AND REFUTE FALSE CLAIMS

As an Itsekiri native with significant interest in the Itsekiri diaspora community and Ugbajo Itsekiri USA Inc., I feel compelled to address numerous inaccurate and misleading statements made by Mr. Otse Amorighoye in his recent interview with Fresh Angle International.

The public deserves factual information based on judicial findings rather than narratives that contradict established court rulings.

Three Court Decisions Validate Ugbajo and Refute Recent Claims First Court Ruling: November 28, 2022 (Judge Pasichow) The Superior Court of the District of Columbia dismissed all allegations of financial impropriety against Ugbajo's leadership, finding:

· NO EVIDENCE supported claims of financial mismanagement

· When questioned under oath, Toju Etchie (Amorighoye's associate) admitted he had no evidence of financial wrongdoing

· The court accepted Kingsley Onuwaje's affidavit that he "never misappropriated Ugbajo's funds or diverted Ugbajo's funds for personal use"

· Every transaction had proper documentation and legitimate business purposes

· ALL claims of breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, and equitable accounting were dismissed via summary judgment This ruling directly contradicts Mr. Amorighoye's repeated references to "financial misappropriation" and a "tainted reputation" in his interview.

The court examined these very allegations and found them to be without merit over two years ago. Second Court Ruling: March 24, 2023 (Judge Kravitz) Judge Kravitz granted Kingsley Onuwaje's motion to dismiss his counterclaim as moot because legitimate elections had been held and he had stepped down as president.

This demonstrates the proper leadership transition within Ugbajo—contrary to Mr. Amorighoye's claims about governance failures. Third Court Ruling: December 13, 2024 (Judge Kravitz) Following an extensive trial, the court issued a comprehensive judgment that: 1. Declared the formation of the "Interim Caretaker Committee" on September 5, 2020 "legally invalid and of no legal effect"

2. Ruled that the elections of Toju Etchie and others (the precursor to INC-USA) were "legally invalid and of no legal effect"

3. Confirmed all elections conducted by the original Ugbajo leadership "have been legally valid"

4. Established that Ugbajo's original leadership are "the only executive officials who have been legally authorized to represent Ugbajo and to act on its behalf since September 5, 2020" 1

5. Determined that Etchie, Nwosu, and others "had no legal authority in 2021 to change the signatories on Ugbajo's bank accounts or to remove or transfer funds"

6. Ordered Mr. Amorighoye's associates to pay $23,000 plus interest for tortious interference On February 24, 2025—just days before Mr. Amorighoye's interview—the court denied motions for stay, reaffirming its findings and noting that Mr. Amorighoye's associates had "unlawfully exercised control over Ugbajo Itsekiri USA, Inc. and its finances."

Rebranding Does Not Erase Legal Reality While INC-USA may now be registered as a separate entity, this organization emerged from actions that courts have repeatedly ruled were "legally invalid and of no legal effect." Rebranding after losing in court does not eliminate legal liabilities or legitimize actions previously ruled improper.

Most concerning:

1. Mr. Amorighoye's interview failed to mention the $23,000 judgment against his associates for tortious interference

2. His claims about representing "70% of the total membership" remain unsubstantiated and contradict court validation of Ugbajo's leadership

3. He continued to repeat allegations of financial mismanagement that a court thoroughly examined and dismissed Potential Legal Consequences of False Statements The publication of demonstrably false statements that damage an organization's reputation— particularly after judicial proceedings have determined those statements to be false—can constitute libel. By continuing to make claims that contradict established judicial findings, Mr. Amorighoye potentially exposes himself to legal liability. His interview contains several statements that could be considered libelous, including:

1. Claims about "financial misappropriation" when a court ruled no such misappropriation occurred

2. Assertions about "lack of transparency" and "weak accountability" when courts validated Ugbajo's governance

3. References to shedding a "tainted legacy" when courts found no such legacy existed

4. Statements that "deficiencies were starkly highlighted by the court case" when the opposite is true Our Commitment to Truth and Community Ugbajo Itsekiri USA Inc. remains committed to serving the Itsekiri diaspora community through transparent governance and faithful stewardship of our resources.

We will continue to operate under the leadership recognized as legitimate by U.S. courts. We urge all members of the Itsekiri community to:

1. Rely on factual information and court-validated findings rather than misleading narratives 2

2. Recognize that the courts have consistently affirmed Ugbajo's legitimacy across multiple rulings

3. Understand that rebranding after adverse court rulings does not eliminate legal responsibilities

4. Support genuine efforts that acknowledge legal realities and court determinations

Please contact Ugbajo Itsekiri USA for accurate information about the organization.

Sincerely,

Bawo Ogbobine

Atlanta GA.

Colin_bine@yahoo.com

×