Technext, a Nigerian technology publication covering the country's startup ecosystem, has said it stands by a report it published on an alleged $4 million settlement case involving Plaude Technologies and Zacuten, rejecting claims from Plaude that the story was defamatory or unprofessional.

In a statement, the publication said it had followed the story for months and that requests for clarification were met with legal notices and calls, including one from a security officer. It added that after the story was published, it received messages, threats of legal action, and a sponsored media attack using established platforms in Nigeria.

“For the avoidance of doubt, Technext wishes to state that it stands by its story and the integrity of the editorial process that brought it to life,” the statement said.

Technext said there was “absolutely nothing libellous” about its publication and that it had carefully detailed the facts as they happened. It added that neither Plaude nor its director disputed the facts as presented, but only objected to “the manner” in which they were presented.

The publication said journalist Omoleye Omoruyi independently verified documents including bank statements, registration directories, police investigation outcomes, and warrants of arrest. It said its report only summarised the findings and that it holds documents and email trails confirming correspondence between the parties, which it said it would be willing to provide when required by the courts.

Technext also said that where the journalist could not verify a claim or document, that limitation was made clear in the story, and that it never claimed to have every angle of the dispute.

According to the statement, Technext contacted Plaude Director Olatomiwa Idowu, CTO Dayo Osikoya, and Chief Commercial Officer Onyeka Akumah, a familiar name in Nigeria's startup scene who previously founded the agritech venture Farmcrowdy. It said all responses received were included in the story, with an undertaking to add further responses if they were later provided.

Technext said Osikoya initially indicated in April that he would respond via WhatsApp, but later stopped responding and deferred to the company's lawyers. The publication said it believed this was done on instruction.

Three days later, Technext said it received a cease-and-desist notice from the lawyers in response to an email in which it acknowledged that “substantial payments was made to Zacuten. And, Plaude could not complete the forex remittance due to cash flow restrictions.” The notice denied other allegations but, according to Technext, did not provide transaction details, documents, or other evidence.

The forex reference touches on a broader, well-documented backdrop: Nigerian businesses have for years contended with dollar shortages and central bank foreign-exchange restrictions that complicate cross-border payments, a recurring friction point in commercial dealings involving local firms.

The publication said the notice demanded that it stop “publishing any unsubstantiated reports against our Client and/or its officers in any medium whatsoever.” Technext said it considers its report substantiated and argued that a cease-and-desist notice is not a court order and does not create a legal obligation for it to comply. Under Nigerian law, defamation claims are ultimately tested in court, where truth is a recognised defence — the forum in which documentation such as the bank statements and email trails Technext says it holds would come under scrutiny.

Technext also said that, apart from bank statements and details of the original transactions between Zacuten and Plaude Technologies, other information cited in the story — including a public announcement by the Nigerian Police about property seizures, bank account restrictions, and a warrant of arrest — was already in the public domain, placing parts of the matter within an active law-enforcement record rather than a purely private commercial disagreement.

“If we fabricated the narrative, did we also fabricate the seizures?” the statement asked.

Technext rejected accusations of unprofessionalism and defamation from Plaude Technologies and its director, reiterating that its report was factual. It said the story was not published to defame anyone, but to provide deeper insight into an issue that had already been the subject of public discussion before its publication. What remains open is whether the dispute proceeds to litigation, where Technext has said it would provide its records, and whether Plaude responds with the transaction details and supporting evidence the publication says the cease-and-desist notice did not include.