Popular Nigerian TikToker Habeeb “Peller” Olalomi has denied making a statement alleging that writer and social commentator Solomon Buchi cheated with another man’s wife.
Peller clarified on a livestream while reacting to reports that Buchi had threatened legal action against him over comments attributed to the TikToker.
According to Peller, his earlier comments were directed at a different person who he said had allegedly abused him online, and not Solomon Buchi.
Peller expressed surprise that the person involved was also named Buchi, saying he was unaware of the man’s name when he made the remarks.
He said he had only intended to “abuse the man back” after allegedly being subjected to repeated insults by him.
Peller explained that the man had previously contacted him and apologised, describing the situation as a misunderstanding.
He said, “This morning, guys, this morning I dey talk say that my fast guys, una know that my fast, Mr. Buchi, that he is abusing me.”
“So I want to abuse the man back! I want to abuse Mr. Buchi that always abuses me; I want to abuse the man back. And the man have already even apologised to me that, ‘Pella, it’s a misunderstanding, this and that.’”
The TikToker said he became confused after realising that the person he was referring to was also named Buchi.
“And this man that always uses English, because his name too is Buchi, I don’t even know that your name is Buchi o! I no know! I no know you are Buchi, I swear to God!”
He further questioned why his comments were allegedly being attributed to Buchi, asking, “Are you the only Buchi in the world? I don’t know o!”
Peller added: “Are you the only Buchi? I didn’t even know your name until now.”
He maintained that his words had been misunderstood and denied making the statement attributed to him concerning Buchi’s wife.
The development follows an earlier controversy surrounding comments made by Peller during a livestream, in which he allegedly claimed that Solomon Buchi had been involved with another man’s wife. Peller has now disputed that interpretation, insisting that his comments were misunderstood.
