A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), , has disputed claims circulating on social media that Jordan Nyesom-Wike admitted receiving $2.1 million from Safwan Garba in a pending Abuja land suit.

Onoja, counsel to Wike, described the reports as a misrepresentation of court proceedings and urged bloggers and social media commentators to verify their claims before publishing them.

In a statement issued in Abuja on Friday, the lawyer said his client had never admitted receiving money from Garba, contrary to reports attributed to an interview granted by I.G. Waru, counsel to the plaintiff.

The suit, filed by Garba against Wike, is pending before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/008/2026.

Onoja said Wike, in his defence, maintained that he had never met Garba or any of his agents. He added that his client reiterated this position while giving evidence in court on September 28 and 30, 2026.

The senior lawyer expressed concern over reports and online commentaries alleging that Wike had admitted receiving the disputed $2.1 million in connection with the Abuja property.

He specifically criticised publications attributed to certain social media commentators and other online platforms, alleging that they misrepresented the proceedings.

Onoja said the circulation of such claims could prejudice public perception of the case, adding that the parties’ lawyers should allow the court to determine the dispute rather than engage in media exchanges over the proceedings.

He also addressed reports concerning a petition to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), saying his client’s legal team had tendered the letter in court to challenge what it described as inconsistencies in Garba’s claims.

The lawyer further alleged that the plaintiff had not adequately brought the document to the court’s attention in his pleadings.

Onoja urged members of the public and media organisations to refrain from presenting disputed claims as established facts while the case remains before the court.

He warned that individuals or media platforms that publish defamatory material could face civil or criminal proceedings, depending on the circumstances and applicable law.

The claims and counterclaims remain subject to determination by the court.