A member of the House of Representatives, Philip Agbese has filed a ₦1 billion defamation lawsuit against Tigran Gambaryan, an executive at Binance, over allegations that he and two other lawmakers demanded a $150 million bribe.
The suit, filed at the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Abuja on Monday, claims that Gambaryan’s statements on social media falsely linked Agbese to corruption, damaging his reputation.
Federal Gov’t Dismisses Binance Executive’s Bribery Accusations
The case, registered as FCT/HC/CV/576/2025, seeks a court declaration that the allegations made against Agbese are defamatory, an order restraining Gambaryan from making further claims, and a public retraction of the accusations.
The lawmaker is also demanding ₦1billion in general damages and ₦5 million to cover the cost of the lawsuit.
The lawsuit is coming on heels of series of social media posts made by Gambaryan, Binance’s Chief Compliance Officer, in which he alleged that Agbese and two other Nigerian legislators sought to receive a $150 million bribe through cryptocurrency transactions.
According to Agbese’s legal team, led by human rights and digital lawyer Barrister S. Ihensekhien, Gambaryan’s statements were false, malicious, and intended to damage the lawmaker’s reputation.
The lawsuit argues that Agbese has never owned a cryptocurrency account and has never conducted any digital currency transactions.
In addition to financial damages, the suit demands that Gambaryan issue a public apology in at least three national newspapers and remove the social media posts containing the allegations.
It also calls for an injunction preventing him or any of his associates from further spreading the claims through the media.
Agbese in a statement issued yesterday said, “On February 10, 2025, I issued a seven-day ultimatum to Tigran Gambaryan, Binance’s Head of Financial Crime Compliance, to retract his defamatory claims and apologise for falsely accusing me of demanding a bribe from Binance. This egregious allegation was a clear attempt to tarnish my reputation and undermine my integrity.
“As reported by the New York Times on May 7, 2024, Binance initially claimed that “unknown persons” had approached them for a bribe on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Financial Crimes. At the time, I did not see fit to join the lawsuit filed by Hon. Ginger Onwusibe against Binance, as the allegations did not specifically mention my name.
“When Gambaryan recently repeated the allegation, categorically mentioning my name, I knew I had to take swift and decisive action. It became expedient to go to court to protect my reputation and defend my integrity.
“Just three days after issuing the ultimatum, Monday, February 17, 2025, I instituted legal proceedings against Gambaryan. My decision to take action was motivated by the need to protect my reputation, not just as an individual, but also as a distinguished Congressman and a representative of my country.”
The Nigerian government has also weighed in on the matter. On 14 February 2025, the Minister of Information and National Orientation dismissed Gambaryan’s allegations, stating that no evidence had been provided to support them.
The government expressed concerns about what it described as the spread of misinformation, particularly from individuals facing legal scrutiny.
Gambaryan has been at the centre of Nigeria’s regulatory crackdown on Binance. The cryptocurrency exchange has faced allegations of financial misconduct, and Gambaryan was detained by Nigerian authorities in February 2024 as part of an investigation into Binance’s activities in the country.
The Nigerian government has accused the platform of operating without proper licensing and facilitating transactions that allegedly undermine the national economy.
The court has instructed that Gambaryan be served notice of the lawsuit through substituted means, either via the online news platform News Naija or through his legal representatives in Nigeria, Aluko & Oyebode, a law firm based in Abuja.
Gambaryan has been given eight days from the date of service to respond, after which the court may proceed with judgment in his absence.
