Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and Nigeria Guild of Editors (NGE) have urged “the government of President Bola Tinubu to immediately end the use of the draconian Cybercrimes Act to target journalists, activists, critics and other Nigerians peacefully expressing their views online, and release those in custody across the country under the legislation.”
The groups said, “The use of the Cybercrimes Act to lock up people peacefully expressing their views sends a chilling message to Nigerians that rights won’t get priority under the Tinubu administration.”
According to the groups, “Using laws that don’t conform with constitutional and guarantees and international human rights standards – like the Cybercrimes Act – erodes democracy and the rule of law in Nigeria.”
The statement followed the press conference on ‘Unchecked Injustice: How Authorities Are Weaponizing the Cybercrimes Act to Stifle Peaceful Dissent and Media Freedom in Nigeria’, held yesterday at the Radisson Hotel, Ikeja. The event was jointly organized by SERAP and NGE to mark the World Press Freedom Day.
The groups also said, “Nigerian authorities at all levels should show that they tolerate peaceful dissent and media freedom if the Nigerian people are to have any chance of holding them accountable on their constitutional oath of office, commitments and promises.”
The statement, read in part: “We are concerned that Nigerian authorities have continued to use the Cybercrime Act to normalize repression of the rights of journalists, bloggers, human rights defenders, opposition politicians, artists and other Nigerians.”
“Nigerian authorities at all levels of government should immediately stop using the Cybercrimes Act and regulations disguised as broadcasting code by the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) to target, intimidate and harass journalists, bloggers, critics and media houses.”
“Impunity for those who threaten, intimidate and harass journalists, bloggers, human rights defenders and activists exacerbates the hostile environment for these defenders of constitutionally and internationally guaranteed human rights in Nigeria.”
“We note that the suppression of the press in recent times takes various forms ranging from extrajudicial to unlawful detentions, disappearances, malicious prosecutions and wrongful use of both legislation and law enforcement.”
“Since the amendment of the Cybercrime Act in 2024, Nigerian authorities at all levels have consistently used the provisions of the Cybercrime Act including the provisions of section 24 on “cyberstalking” to harass, intimidate, arbitrarily arrest and detain and unfairly prosecute users of social media, activists, and journalists.”
“Nigerian authorities at all levels increasingly use criminal defamation laws and other repressive laws to crack down on human rights and peaceful dissent, bringing frivolous lawsuits against journalists, bloggers, human rights defenders and activists.”
“We are also concerned about the persistence of threats to journalists’ safety, and the potential chilling effect of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) and harassment, including by security agencies and politicians.”
“We note that journalists, bloggers, human rights defenders and activists play an indispensable role in documenting and reporting on human rights violations.”
“The right to freedom of expression applies to all kinds of information and ideas, including those that may shock, offend or disturb, and irrespective of the truth or falsehood of the content.”
“The provisions of the provisions of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act 2024, including Section 24 are inconsistent with the provisions of section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to which Nigeria is a state party.”
“We note that the ECOWAS Court of Justice on 25 March 2022 held that section 24 of the Cybercrime Act is arbitrary, vague and repressive and therefore, is in contravention of Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
“The Court also ordered the Federal Government to amend section 24 of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015 in accordance with the country’s obligations under Article 1 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.”
“However, while the National Assembly amended the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention etc.) Act, 2015 in 2024, section 24 of the Cybercrimes Act (as amended) is still vaguely worded, arbitrary and easily lends itself to subjective interpretation and repressive use by the Nigerian authorities.”
“Because the provisions of section 24 of the Cybercrimes Act 2024 are so broadly defined as to expose them to abuse for less legitimate ends, Nigerian authorities have persistently used these provisions to crackdown and violate the human rights of Nigerians including activists, bloggers, journalists, and social media users.”
“The amended Cybercrime Act 2024, despite the wide-ranging provisions in its section 24, still provides a vaguely worded meaning for ‘Cyberstalking’ in section 58 as ‘a course of conduct, directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to feel fear.’”
Leave a Comment