A public interest lawyer and Daily Trust 2026 Unsung Hero, Samuel Ihensekhien, has petitioned the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and the Pentecostal Fellowship of Nigeria (PFN) over what he described as sustained attacks on the Christian faith, the prophetic ministry and church leaders by social media activist Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as Very Dark Man (VDM).
Ihensekhien, an ecclesiastic and public interest lawyer, made the demand in an open letter dated October 4, 2026, addressed to the President of CAN, His Eminence Most Reverend Daniel C. Okoh, and the National President of PFN, His Grace Archbishop Francis Wale Oke.
The lawyer called for urgent intervention by the two major Christian bodies, warning that the alleged activities of VDM and members of his online group, known as the Ratels, could heighten religious tensions if left unchecked.
Ihensekhien, who stated that he had previously engaged VDM and is counsel in the ongoing FCT High Court Suit No. FCT/CV/3340/2024 involving allegations that the activist forged high-profile church receipts, accused the social media personality of conducting continuous online campaigns against Apostle Arome Osayi and at least five other pastors.
According to him, the alleged attacks have included public mockery of physical conditions, ridicule of sermons and what he described as character assassination, resulting in social media being “heavily littered” with anti-Christian content.
The lawyer said the situation had recently escalated following alleged threats issued by VDM and members of the Ratels group against Apostle Magnus Seyi.
He alleged that VDM publicly shared the cleric’s name, church and address, after which members of the group contacted the Apostle and warned him to “watch his back”, while allegedly stating that VDM was “coming after him” and making references to possible casualties.
Ihensekhien argued that the alleged conduct raises serious legal and constitutional concerns, citing Section 38 of the 1999 Constitution on freedom of religion, Section 39 as limited by Section 45, Section 24 of the Cybercrimes Act 2015 relating to cyberstalking and threats, as well as Sections 204 and 366 of the Criminal Code dealing with insult to religion and intimidation respectively.
He further expressed concern over what he described as VDM’s mobilisation of followers, inflammatory rhetoric and increasing confrontations with Christian leaders.
The lawyer also referred to a reported visit by VDM to a native doctor’s shrine, where he said the activist performed traditional fortification rituals and ancestor pacification.
“Having engaged in such traditional religious practices and the service of deities, one must ask why he has chosen to mount continuous, aggressive attacks specifically against the Christian religion,” the petition stated.
Ihensekhien warned that the alleged pattern of conduct could create wider religious tensions, particularly if supporters on either side became mobilised against one another.
He referenced past religious and ethno-religious conflicts, including the Kaduna Sharia riots of 2000, successive crises in Jos, the Rwandan genocide, the Yugoslav wars, the Gujarat riots of 2002 and the Lebanese civil war, as examples of how religious tensions can escalate when left unchecked.
The lawyer therefore urged CAN and PFN to issue an immediate public condemnation of the alleged attacks and formally report VDM and identified members of the Ratels group to the Nigeria Police Force, Department of State Services (DSS), National Cybercrime Centre and other relevant agencies for investigation.
He also called on the Christian bodies to petition the Presidency and engage social media platforms over the alleged circulation of content targeting Christian leaders and the faith.
Ihensekhien insisted that the matter required urgent attention from the leadership of the Nigerian Christian community, arguing that failure to respond could allow the situation to escalate beyond online exchanges.
“The Body of Christ in Nigeria must speak with one clear voice in defence of its faith, its leaders, and the constitutional order that protects religious freedom for all,” he stated.