“You Can’t Scare Me Away From My Children” Emmanuel Obasi Reacts to Judy Austin’s Reported ₦1bn Lawsuit
Emmanuel Obasi, the former husband of Nollywood actress Judy Austin, has reacted strongly to the reported ₦1 billion defamation lawsuit filed against him, insisting that the legal action will not stop him from demanding access to his children.
The dispute, which has attracted considerable attention on social media, is the latest development in the long-running conflict between the former couple. Obasi has repeatedly alleged that he has been prevented from seeing the children from their previous marriage. Judy Austin’s legal action reportedly concerns statements she considers defamatory.
According to TheCable Lifestyle, Austin instituted legal proceedings against Obasi and veteran actress Rita Edochie over alleged defamatory publications. Reports indicate that she is seeking more than ₦1 billion in general damages from each defendant.
Reacting in a video circulating online, Obasi appeared amused by the amount reportedly being demanded.
“Mr Obasi has become Central Bank. You sue me one billion. You fit count them? I’m just laughing since yesterday,” he said.
However, beneath the humour was a firm declaration that he would continue seeking contact with his children regardless of the consequences.
“There is nothing I cannot do to have my children. Just mark my word,” he declared.
Obasi referred to an assertion reportedly contained in the lawsuit that the last telephone conversation between him and Judy occurred in 2018. He argued that the statement raised questions about what happened afterwards and why he allegedly lost contact with the children.
“Thank God in that your lawsuit, you said that the last time I called you was in 2018. So, you accepted it. You said it by yourself; you wrote that the last time I called you was in 2018. Let it be so,” he said.
“What happened since 2018? Did you block me or not? Why are you hiding my children from me? Why are you manipulating those children? That is the question.”
Obasi maintained that the lawsuit would not intimidate him into abandoning his demands. He described the matter as one on which he had taken a determined position, even if his continued public statements eventually exposed him to legal penalties.
“Do you think that lawsuit can scare me away from asking for my children? The answer is no. You don’t know me very well,” he said.
“I’m the type of person that, when I determine on something, I determine it in two ways. It’s either I have my children or I go to jail.”
He jokingly added that he had asked a tailor to prepare prison clothing in his size, apparently illustrating how prepared he believed himself to be for any consequence.
In another controversial part of his statement, Obasi alleged that Judy once travelled from Enugu to meet him in Nkpor, near Onitsha, as part of an attempt to resolve their marital difficulties.
He claimed that they stayed at Harrison Hotel on New Market Road, where they discussed several family issues and were intimate. He also alleged that they went to Mr Bigg’s the following morning to purchase items for their children.
These are personal allegations made solely by Obasi. They have not been independently verified, and Judy Austin’s response to these particular assertions was not available at the time of publication.
Obasi presented the alleged encounter as evidence supporting his position that his earlier public accounts were truthful. He questioned whether repeating what he claimed to have personally experienced should be treated as defamation.
“I came out online and said what I experienced and what happened to me, and you say it’s defamation of character,” he said.
“I thought defamation is supposed to be when somebody lies against you, then you can sue the person for defaming you.”
However, whether a publication is legally defamatory is not determined merely by the speaker’s insistence that it is true. A court may examine the accuracy of the statements, the evidence supporting them, their context, how they were communicated and whether they unlawfully damaged another person’s reputation.
Despite his combative reaction, Obasi has also expressed optimism that the court proceedings could finally create an opportunity for him to see his children.
In an interview reported by TheCable Lifestyle, he said he was happy about the lawsuit because he believed the children might appear in court when the hearing begins.
“I’ve gotten the information a while back. I’m happy that she sued me because at least I’ll be able to see my kids after over 12 years,” he said.
Obasi has previously claimed that he was denied access to the children for more than a decade. That claim remains part of his account of the dispute and should not be interpreted as a judicial finding against Austin.
Meanwhile, Judy Austin has publicly disputed some allegations connected to her former marriage. Reports say she maintains that the union with Obasi ended years before her relationship and subsequent marriage to actor Yul Edochie. The present lawsuit represents her decision to seek legal redress over statements she considers damaging to her reputation.
The controversy combines serious legal questions with an emotionally charged disagreement over children, reputation and the breakdown of a former marriage.
While both parties are entitled to present their respective accounts, the competing allegations have not yet been conclusively determined by a court. A claim for ₦1 billion is also not the same as an award: the claimant must prove the case, and the court will determine whether any remedy or damages should be granted.
As the public debate continues, the welfare and privacy of the children should remain central. Personal accusations circulated online can leave permanent digital records and may deepen an already difficult family conflict.
For now, Obasi says he will continue speaking and demanding access to his children, while Austin has chosen to challenge the allegedly defamatory statements through the judicial process. The court not social media will ultimately determine the legal merits of the dispute.
Editorial note: This report attributes all disputed personal claims to the individuals who made them. The allegations concerning the former couple’s private relationship have not been independently verified, and no court has ruled on their truth as of publication.
