Gangs of Lagos, since its release, has been a subject of controversies among the indigenous people of Lagos State, with the Isale Eko Descendants Union claiming that the film depicted Isale Eko as a den of criminals and Eyo masquerade as a gang of murderers.
The Oba of Lagos, Rilwan Akiolu, has described the movie "Gangs of Lagos" as defamatory and sacrilegious for depicting the 'Eyo' as criminal gangs that commit grotesque murder and visit terror on innocent citizens.
Directed by Jade Osiberu and Kemi Lala Akindoju, the movie premiered on Amazon Prime Video in April as the first Amazon Original Movie from Africa.
It stars Tobi Bakre, Adesua Etomi, Olarotimi Fakunle, Iyabo Ojo, Pasuma, and Chike, among others and has names like Adesegun Adetoro, Demi Olubanwo, Olumide Soyombo, Bankole Wellington, Adesua Etomi- Wellington, and Kola Aina as Executive Producers.
In one of the scenes of 'Gangs of Lagos', the movie portrays assassins operating under cover of Eyo masquerades; this, the Isale Eko Descendants Union (IDU) claims depicted Isale Eko as a den of criminals and Eyo masquerade as a gang of murderers.
The traditional ruler raised concerns about the film in a three-page letter he addressed to the management of Amazon Prime Nigeria and Greoh Ltd. on 28 June, listing four conditions that the producers and promoters should meet within 14 days.
The monarch also asked Amazon Web Service, Greoh Studios and the film producers "to immediately remove, cease and desist from using the image getup and manifestation of the Eyo in the Gangs of Lagos because the film has inflicted enormous reputational damage on the Eyo brand.
The descendants of Isale Eko had equally instituted a suit seeking N10 billion damages against Amazon and other producers over what they described as enormous reputational damage the Gangs of Lagos inflicted on the Eyo brand.
Cease and Desist
Mr Akiolu, in his letter, copied the Governor of Lagos State, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, claiming that the illegal representation of the Eyo by the movie had caused substantial reputational damage to the Eyo brand.
The traditional ruler also claimed that on the international stage, potential tourists and visitors to Lagos were likely to query the authenticity of the Eyo as an actual cultural heritage event deserving of respect and reverence.
He further claimed that the film producers had used the complete outfit, indistinguishable image and traditionally designed and ordained appearance of the Eyo, which forms part of the cultural heritage of the indigenous people of Lagos, for commercial gain and exploitation.
He said this was done without permission or due reference to the office of the Oba of Lagos.
"I am the custodian and final authority of the Adimu Orisa and its manifestation, the Eyo. These traditional rites are the tangible and intangible property of the indigenes of Lagos, and these are their bundle of intellectual property rights in our cultural heritage.
"This cultural heritage is the legacy of physical artefacts and intangible attributes inherited from past generations over two hundred years ago, maintained in the present by the Oba of Lagos and bestowed for the benefit of future generations.
"These traditions express our way of life and thought. They are proofs of our intellectual and spiritual achievements. They must not be used without the indigenous owners' express permission or defiled in any way whatsoever," he said.
The Oba alleged that the film grossly violated the rights of the indigenous people of Lagos contrary to the provisions of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 2007.
Under international law, Oba Akiolu noted that the declaration protects "our indigenous right to practise and revitalise our cultural traditions and customs.
"This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of our cultures, including artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature."
Mr Akiolu, therefore, demanded that the continued use and depiction of the Eyo in the film and its blatant violation of indigenous intellectual property rights and defaming sacred rites should stop immediately.
As part of peace conditions, Mr Akiolu directed the film producers to "immediately remove, cease and desist from using the image getup and manifestation of the Adimu Orisa - the Eyo - your film Gangs of Lagos."
He also asked the film producers to submit within 14 days a proposal for consideration for the restitution of the sanctity of the Eyo brand.
He asked the film producers to "provide within 14 days a compensatory proposal for the infringement of our intellectual property rights in our cultural heritage, which you have commercially exploited without a licence."
The traditional ruler demanded that the producers of Gangs of Lagos submit within 14 days a draft of an appropriately worded apology to the Oba of Lagos and the indigenous people of Lagos.
Amazon Web Services
Amazon Web Services Nigeria, a subsidiary of Amazon Inc. and founder of Prime Video Nigeria, has claimed that its film, "Gangs of Lagos", is not injurious to anyone.
This was revealed in a preliminary objection by the global entertainment company in a suit filed by the Isale-Eko Descendants Union (IDU), among others, and made available to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Friday in Lagos.
NAN reports that the company is a defendant in a suit, No LD/6903GCM/2023, before a Lagos High Court, instituted by the IDU, following its production 'Gang of Lagos'.
The IDU had sued the company, claiming N10 billion damages before Justice Idowu Alakija of the Lagos High Court, over the film's contents.
Justice Alakija had fixed an October date to determine Amazon's preliminary objection to the suit.
Before the court, the defendants had queried Lagos State's jurisdiction over the film's production by some state indigenes.
In the suit, the defendants are questioning the authority of the Lagos State Government to censor films and videos produced within its jurisdictions stipulated in the Cinematograph Law of Lagos State, 2004.
Amazon, accused of the alleged depiction of the claimants' territory as a den of criminals and its traditional Eyo as a gang, argued that the state's Cinematography Law was inapplicable.
Equally, the defendants sought an order of the court under Section 25(1)(q) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, to strike out the suit as it lacked the jurisdiction to entertain same.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
According to the defendants, the Law under which the suit was filed was irrelevant to the video and films censors law of Lagos State, explaining that the appropriate direction was that of the National Film and Video Censors Board Act, 1993.
Aside from the corporate body, other defendants in the suit are Mrs Jadesola Osiberu, Ms Kemi Lala-Akindoju, Mr Adesegun Adetoro, Demi Olubanwo, Mr Olumide Soyombo and Mr Bankole Wellington.
Other defendants in the suit are Mrs Adesua Etomi-Wellington, Mr Kola Aina, Greoh Ltd. and Amazon Web Services Nigeria for an alleged sacrilegious and scandalous depiction of Eyo Masquerade in the movie.
The claimants are Chief Ayodele Bajulaiye, who sued on behalf of Bajulaiye Chieftaincy Family and Eyo Iga Bajulaiye and Chief Abdul-Waheed Ayeni on behalf of Sasore Chieftaincy Family and Eyo Iga Sasore.
However, in its preliminary objection, Amazon challenged the powers of the Lagos State Government on its regulatory role in the case.
It consequently requested the court to dismiss the Lagos State Cinematography Law, which they claimed was enacted outside the legislative competence of the Lagos State House of Assembly.
The defendants claimed that the High Court of Lagos State had no jurisdiction to compel the Lagos State Government to censor the said film under its Cinematography Law which it argued falls within the provisions of the National Film and Video Censors Board Act.
The 1999 constitution, the defendants averred, precludes the High Court of Justice from "exercising jurisdiction over interpretation of the Constitution as it relates to the federal government and its agencies'.
(NAN)
