A growing controversy surrounding a proposed biopic on late Ibadan politician Lamidi Adedibu has taken a fresh turn after the film’s producer reportedly petitioned the Inspector-General of Police over alleged death threats and cyberbullying linked to the project.
The dispute has also drawn attention to the demands by members of the late politician’s family for the film to be removed, raising questions about the balance between creative freedom, family concerns and the right to tell the stories of influential public figures.
According to a report published by Premium Times on October 19, the producer approached the police over alleged threats and online harassment connected to the film. The family has reportedly challenged the project, arguing that it contains false accounts of Adedibu’s private life and political career.
The allegations have not been independently established in the available reporting, and the petition should not be treated as proof that any individual committed an offence.
Lamidi Adedibu, who died in 2008, remains a widely discussed figure in Oyo State political history. Known for his influential role in Ibadan politics, he was a powerful political organiser whose methods and influence generated both support and criticism during his lifetime.
A film about a figure of his stature is likely to attract strong reactions because it touches on political history, personal reputation and the memories of people who knew him or experienced his influence.
For filmmakers, biographical projects can offer an opportunity to revisit important chapters of Nigerian history and introduce younger audiences to personalities who shaped public life. However, such productions can also become contentious when relatives dispute the portrayal of a subject’s personal affairs or challenge the accuracy of the story.
In this case, the disagreement has moved beyond a debate about the film’s content, with the producer’s reported petition introducing a further legal dimension.
The central issues include whether the disputed material can be substantiated, how the filmmaker intends to respond to the family’s objections, and whether the parties can resolve their differences without further escalation.
For now, the reported petition and the family’s objections represent competing positions in a developing dispute. A final assessment will depend on the evidence supporting the allegations, any response from the police, and further statements from the people involved.
The controversy also highlights a recurring challenge for Nollywood: how to make films about powerful historical figures while addressing concerns about factual accuracy, privacy, reputation and artistic independence.
Neither a demand to withdraw a film nor a petition to the police, on its own, establishes which side is right. The facts, supporting evidence and any eventual legal findings will be important in determining the next stage of the disput.
