Preventing misuse of the Cybercrimes Act: Protecting free speech and unlocking economic growth, By Mills, Selin, et al.

The undersigned Heads of Mission in Nigeria encourage Nigerian lawmakers to consider reform of the Cybercrimes Act to narrow the definitions of key terms such as “false information,” cyberstalking,” insult,” hatred,” and “harassment,” and ensure those definitions cannot be used erroneously to silence critics and censor expression. As friends of Nigeria who share the country’s strong commitment to democratic values, we want Nigeria to realise its potential as a democratic digital powerhouse.

On Democracy Day, the heads of missions of the United States, United Kingdom, Finland, Norway, and Canada would like to recognise and congratulate the Nigerian people’s commitment to 26 years of democratic governance. Healthy democracies are formed of many important ingredients and when marking 25 years of democracy in Nigeria in 2024, President Tinubu underlined that in Nigeria “there must be diverse perspectives and viewpoints.” Free expression has long been a core value of Nigeria’s democracy. Nigeria’s constitution enshrines the right to freedom of expression, aiming to protect its citizens’ rights and foster a society where people can debate and discuss ideas free from government control. This right, a principle of trusting ordinary citizens to have discussion in the virtual public square, remains vital today.

In April, Nigeria’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) raised concerns about the 2015 Cybercrimes Act, the amendments made to it in 2024, and the law’s impact on free expression. The Act has laudable aims: to combat online fraud and cyberattacks. There is growing evidence, however, that the Act is being misused by some to silence criticism and dissent. The NHRC’s advisory opinion on freedom of expression warned that it “has potentials for abuse, particularly with respect to arrests and prosecutions of activists, journalists, bloggers, and ordinary social media users.” In addition, in 2022 the ECOWAS Court of Justice ruled that the Act is not in conformity with the country’s obligations related to freedom of expression under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Misuse of the Cybercrimes Act undermines democratic advancement and civic participation. It also jeopardises the confidence of investors and risks deterring the innovation needed for economic growth.

The implications extend beyond free expression. Nigeria’s economic future depends on its ability to innovate and attract investment in the digital age. However, the Cybercrimes Act’s misapplication, even in a small number of cases, risks detracting the innovators and entrepreneurs the government wants to invest in Nigeria. The Cybercrimes Act also contributes to uncertainty abroad about Nigeria’s legal landscape.

Consider the case of Dele Farotimi, charged with 12 counts of cybercrime after he reported alleged corruption in the judiciary in a book and on a podcast. Farotimi was allegedly detained in Lagos, transported across state lines to Ekiti, and brought to court in handcuffs. Though the charges were eventually withdrawn, his ordeal highlights a troubling issue – the Cybercrimes Act, originally intended to combat online fraud and cyberterrorism, can be misused as a tool to stifle free expression and undermine democratic engagement. Farotimi is not alone. Journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens have faced similar charges for sharing opinions or reporting on alleged corruption. This distortion of the law’s original intent can lead to citizens becoming hesitant to speak out, weakening democratic accountability and potentially fuelling distrust in government.

The Nigeria Communications Commission (NCC) estimates the country loses $500 million per year to cybercrime. This problem requires a response. However, the Cybercrimes Act’s broad language, especially its vague definitions of “false information,” “cyberstalking,” “harassment,” and “insult” leave room for confusion and potential abuse. The law’s broad scope allows it to be misused against Nigerian citizens seeking to express dissent, form opinions, or criticise powerful people. NHRC has called on law enforcement to “exercise caution” in how they interpret the Act’s frequently used Section 24 to make sure that charges reflect an actual threat to public order. We therefore welcome the commitment from Nigeria’s Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, to collaborate with the National Assembly and relevant stakeholders in reviewing the Cybercrimes Act, so that it protects the values enshrined in Nigeria’s constitution.

The implications extend beyond free expression. Nigeria’s economic future depends on its ability to innovate and attract investment in the digital age. However, the Cybercrimes Act’s misapplication, even in a small number of cases, risks detracting the innovators and entrepreneurs the government wants to invest in Nigeria. The Cybercrimes Act also contributes to uncertainty abroad about Nigeria’s legal landscape. Its vague provisions make it difficult for businesses and investors to assess legal risks, hindering investment in industries that rely on digital content. Reform is needed to protect both citizens’ rights and Nigeria’s future.

Free expression is a precious commodity that relies on all of us to respect it. It is a fundamental tenant of Nigeria’s constitution. Nigerians, and any citizens of countries around the world, should be able to hold and express their views, even if those opinions are unpopular.

The undersigned Heads of Mission in Nigeria encourage Nigerian lawmakers to consider reform of the Cybercrimes Act to narrow the definitions of key terms such as “false information,” cyberstalking,” insult,” hatred,” and “harassment,” and ensure those definitions cannot be used erroneously to silence critics and censor expression. As friends of Nigeria who share the country’s strong commitment to democratic values, we want Nigeria to realise its potential as a democratic digital powerhouse. We would therefore welcome the Nigerian government amending the Act to strike a balance between protecting citizens while preserving human rights, including free expression. This will be a difficult balance to strike but is vital for delivering what Nigeria wants: a stable and open democracy, and economic growth underpinned by investment.

Join the Premium Times WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.

Open in WhatsApp

Nigeria is not alone in facing this problem. Democracies across the world are grappling with the ever-evolving challenges and opportunities that the digital world presents. Through the Council of Europe’s Global Action on Cybercrime project, Nigerian lawmakers are receiving funding and technical assistance to help the current review of the Act lead to legislation that meets international standards and best practices. However, the deadline for the Act’s review has consistently been delayed, and we urge Nigerian lawmakers to make this review a priority, and ensure it is open to public consultation and debate.

Free expression is a precious commodity that relies on all of us to respect it. It is a fundamental tenant of Nigeria’s constitution. Nigerians, and any citizens of countries around the world, should be able to hold and express their views, even if those opinions are unpopular.

Signed

Heads of Missions

Richard M Mills, Jr, US Embassy
Richard Montgomery, British High Commission
Sanna Selin, Embassy of Finland
Svein Baera, Embassy of Norway
Pasquale Salvaggio, Canadian High Commission