In the complex and often murky world of celebrity disputes, the public spat between social justice advocate Mr. Emeka Ugwuonye and his former member/client May Yul-Edochie offers a compelling modern cautionary tale. What began as a strategic legal Media partnership has devolved into a bitter legal and public relations war, with a faceless online mob at its center. This conflict highlights a crucial question for public figures: when does a loyal fanbase cross the line from a support system to a liability?
For a significant period, Mr. Ugwuonye’s Due Process Advocates (DPA) was instrumental in shaping the public narrative of May Yul-Edochie’s high-profile divorce. Leveraging its social media platforms, DPA successfully framed her as a dignified victim, garnering widespread public sympathy. However, this powerful alliance collapsed in July 2025 when Mr. Ugwuonye withdrew his services, citing “persistent bullying and trolling” by a faction of her supporters known as the “May Nation.” This withdrawal was not a quiet parting of ways but a public severance, marking the beginning of a new and more volatile chapter.
The dispute quickly escalated. In September 2025, May, through her new legal team, served Mr. Ugwuonye with a cease-and-desist letter, demanding ₦1 billion in damages for alleged cyberbullying and defamation. Mr. Ugwuonye, in turn, has welcomed the legal challenge, portraying it as an opportunity to expose what he claims is the “truth” behind the facade. His counter-narrative, which positions May as the “de-facto leader” of a vicious organization, transforms the entire discourse.
At the heart of this saga is the “May Nation.” This decentralized “digital army” operates without formal leadership, launching coordinated campaigns of aggressive advocacy, trolling, and harassment against anyone deemed an enemy of May Yul-Edochie. Their targets have included not only Yul Edochie and his partner, but also former allies of May, such as Mr. Ugwuonye and others like Linc Edochie, Anita Joseph, and Yinka Theisen. This online group’s intense activities were the very reason Ugwuonye stated he withdrew from the case, a claim now being tested in the public and legal arenas.
The situation is further complicated by May Yul-Edochie’s public endorsement of the group. In a podcast interview on September 7, 2025, she praised “May Nation,” calling them a “formidable force” and her “worthy support system” that fights her “battles.” While this may have been an attempt to show gratitude to her followers, it legally links her to the mob’s actions. This public acknowledgment, combined with the activities of her online fanbase, creates a propensity for litigation. There are already a number of individuals who have fallen out with her due to the online harassment, and the resentment over how she is perceived to use the mob to her advantage could lead to multiple lawsuits.
From a legal and public relations standpoint, May’s endorsement opens several vulnerabilities. Her legal team may struggle to maintain a “dignified victim” narrative when her supporters are engaging in aggressive, and at times, fabricated online attacks. Opposing counsel could leverage this behavior to argue that she is attempting to influence the court through public intimidation. A judge, who values decorum and impartiality, might view this “media trial” as an affront to the legal process, potentially scrutinizing May’s case more harshly.
Ultimately, this dispute serves as a cautionary tale for public figures navigating the digital age. While online fanbases can be a powerful tool for advocacy and support, they are also unpredictable and often uncontrollable. The May Yul-Edochie case demonstrates how the line between a passionate support system and a litigiously vulnerable online mob can quickly blur, turning a PR battle into a complicated legal quagmire. Mr. Ugwuonye’s PR strategy, therefore, becomes one of self-preservation and professional justification: his withdrawal was not an act of aggression, but a necessary boundary against a toxic environment. His actions now, in response to legal threats, are framed as a fight for professional integrity against a dangerous and volatile online force.
The post Editorial: The “May Nation” and the perils of digital advocacy appeared first on Diaspora Digital Media DDM.
