VDM’s Legal Team Clears GTBank, Confirms EFCC Arrest Over Money Laundering Allegations

The legal team representing popular social media commentator and activist, Martins Vincent Otse, widely known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), has come forward to clarify the circumstances surrounding his recent arrest in Abuja. Responding to swirling online rumors, the lawyers firmly dismissed speculations that Guaranty Trust Bank (GTBank) played any role in the arrest, emphasizing instead that it was carried out solely by state security agents.

Earlier reports had linked VDM’s arrest to a recent visit he made to a GTBank branch where he lodged complaints about alleged unauthorized transactions from his mother’s bank account. This interaction, though public and captured on social media, was wrongly interpreted by some netizens as the trigger for his subsequent detention.

Federal Government Issues Salt Intake Warning After Oyakhilome’s Controversial Advice

Setting the record straight, Deji Adeyanju, a human rights lawyer and member of VDM’s legal team, addressed the issue in a social media statement.

“There is no connection between GTBank and the arrest of my client,” Adeyanju stated. “It happened in an entirely different location and was conducted by state actors.”

According to Adeyanju, VDM’s arrest was executed by operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) at Area 3 in Abuja, a few hours after his visit to the bank. The EFCC reportedly acted on suspicions of money laundering, which are now the central focus of the agency’s investigation.

VDM, known for his bold social commentary and frequent clashes with influencers and public figures, was detained for a brief period before being released on Wednesday. However, despite being granted bail, Adeyanju disclosed that his client’s mobile phone and vehicle remain in EFCC custody.

VDM’s Lawyers Dispel GTBank Involvement Amid EFCC Probe

“Despite everything that has happened, I still like the EFCC Chairman,” Adeyanju said in his Thursday morning statement. “And there was no condition for VDM’s bail. I was the one who applied for his bail and I made an undertaking to produce him anytime he is needed. His phone and car are still with the EFCC.”

The lawyer’s remarks offer insight into the legal processes surrounding VDM’s temporary freedom. It appears that the EFCC granted bail based on Adeyanju’s personal undertaking, without imposing traditional conditions such as sureties or bond payments. The continued detention of VDM’s belongings, however, signals that the investigation is ongoing.

VDM’s arrest has reignited broader conversations about freedom of expression, online activism, and financial surveillance in Nigeria. As a figure with a large social media following, his critical videos often target perceived corruption, abuse of power, and societal issues. While this has earned him a loyal base of supporters, it has also drawn scrutiny from authorities and those he openly criticizes.

This isn’t the first time VDM has had brushes with the law. His outspoken nature and refusal to self-censor have occasionally landed him in controversy, both offline and online. His arrest by the EFCC over money laundering allegations marks a serious turn in his legal challenges, potentially shifting the public narrative from one of free speech to criminal investigation.

Still, his legal team remains confident in his innocence. They insist the arrest was not linked to his activism or bank complaints, but rather a separate investigation that will run its course. GTBank, whose name had initially been dragged into the matter, is now formally cleared of any wrongdoing or involvement.

The clarification from Adeyanju also appears aimed at tempering rising public emotion and misinformation that had spread online following VDM’s arrest. Many of his fans, quick to associate the timing of the bank visit with the EFCC’s actions, began speculating about a possible corporate conspiracy. However, with the legal clarification now public, those theories have been largely debunked.

As of now, VDM has not publicly commented in detail about his experience with the EFCC. His social media activity remains limited, likely due to the seizure of his phone and the ongoing nature of the investigation. His legal team, however, promises to ensure his rights are protected throughout the process and that he will continue to cooperate fully with authorities.

In conclusion, the incident involving VeryDarkMan serves as a reminder of the complex intersections between digital activism, financial institutions, and law enforcement in Nigeria. While public figures enjoy wide followings and digital influence, they also operate under the scrutiny of regulatory agencies empowered to investigate financial irregularities. The EFCC’s role, now clarified, stands apart from the unrelated bank visit, reinforcing the importance of fact-based narratives in today’s digital age.