Social media activist Mark Chidiebere Justice, popularly known as Justice Crack, has rejected allegations by the Minister of Defence, Mohammed Christopher Musa, that he directed Nigerian soldiers to remove meat from their meals to create a false impression of poor feeding in a viral video.
The activist’s rebuttal followed comments made by the minister during an interview on News Central Television, where he dismissed claims that soldiers were being poorly fed and accused the activist of orchestrating the video to mislead the public.
According to the minister, the footage did not accurately reflect the quality of meals provided to military personnel.
“The soldiers’ food was okay. There was meat, there was all these things. He told them to put all these things out and make it look as if those things were not there,” Musa said during the interview.
However, in a statement issued on Thursday, Justice Crack described the allegation as false, insisting that he neither had contact with the soldiers featured in the video nor possessed the authority to instruct military personnel on any matter.
“The Minister of Defence, General Christopher Gwabin Musa (Rtd), lied during an interview on News Central that I, JusticeCrack, instructed military officers to remove meat and other items from their meals to make the food appear inadequate,” he said.
“I never told any military officer to remove meat or anything else from their food. What authority do I have to give such an instruction? I am not a General, a Commander, or a Colonel. I have no military background whatsoever. Why would I instruct serving military personnel to do such a thing?”
The activist maintained that the initiative to raise concerns about military welfare did not originate from him but from some soldiers who allegedly contacted him to share their grievances.
He said his intention was to draw attention to the welfare challenges facing military personnel and encourage the authorities to address them.
“It is important for the public to know that I never reached out to military officers. Rather, some of them reached out to me to express concerns about their welfare.
“In good faith, I made a video to raise awareness so that the military authorities could pay attention to the welfare of the officers and men serving our country. My intention was simply to advocate for better working conditions, improved welfare, and better living conditions for the brave men and women who defend Nigeria,” he stated.
Justice Crack argued that the minister’s remarks could negatively affect his reputation, describing the comments as damaging and unsupported by evidence.
“It is deeply painful and, in my view, defamatory to hear the Honourable Minister of Defence make such a statement about me on national television without presenting any evidence.
“Such a statement has the potential to damage my reputation and misrepresent my intentions before the Nigerian public,” he said.
The activist reiterated that his public interventions have consistently focused on accountability, good governance and improved welfare for security personnel.
“I therefore wish to make it abundantly clear that I, Mark Chidiebere Justice, popularly known as JusticeCrack, never instructed any military officer to remove meat or any other item from their food.
“My advocacy has always been about accountability, better welfare for our security personnel, and good governance. This statement is made solely to correct the record and inform the Nigerian public of the true position,” he added.
The controversy stems from a viral video circulated earlier this year alleging inadequate feeding arrangements for Nigerian soldiers.
In May, Justice Crack was remanded in prison custody after being arraigned on charges linked to the video. He was accused of committing cyber-related offences through content posted on his social media platform.
One of the charges alleged that he knowingly disseminated false information concerning the welfare and feeding of Nigerian Army personnel through his social media handle, @JusticeCrack.
Prosecutors claimed the publication was intended to provoke public resentment and disaffection, contrary to provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015, as amended.
The case has continued to generate debate over freedom of expression, whistleblowing and welfare conditions within Nigeria’s security services.