Human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), has called on the Federal Government, state governors, and the first ladies of the 36 states to “immediately end digital repression” and uphold constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression, media freedom, and citizens’ digital rights.
Falana made the call while presenting a paper titled “Press Freedom and Cybercrime Law in Nigeria: Bridging the Justice Gaps” at the plenary session of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL).
He warned that digital tools and cybercrime legislation are increasingly being used to target journalists, activists, students, whistleblowers, and political critics, despite clear constitutional and judicial safeguards.
“Across Nigeria, serving and former public officers, and increasingly their spouses, have systematically weaponised law enforcement agencies to silence journalists, students, activists, whistleblowers, and political opponents,” Falana said.
He noted that these practices persist despite the protections in Sections 35, 36 and 39 of the 1999 Constitution, as well as binding decisions of Nigerian courts and the ECOWAS Court of Justice. He described the situation as a lingering “military culture” that still shapes law enforcement conduct more than two decades after Nigeria’s return to democracy.
Falana recalled that although Section 24 of the Cybercrime Act was amended in February 2024 to remove vague terms such as “annoyance,” “insult,” and “ill-will,” security agencies continue to arrest citizens under the repealed provisions.
He described this as “a profound justice gap” that undermines the rule of law.
“Press freedom remains a constitutional and democratic imperative in Nigeria. Yet, cyber-security legislation, particularly the former Section 24 of the Cybercrime Act, has been systematically weaponised by public officials and their spouses to silence dissent,” he said.
Drawing parallels with Nigeria’s past, Falana cited the use of colonial-era sedition laws, military decrees, and “false news” offences to suppress opposition. He referenced Decree 4 of 1984, the imprisonment of journalists Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor, and detentions under Decree 2.
“These incidents illustrate how sedition and ‘false news’ offences were weaponised to shield the powerful and silence dissent,” he said, stressing that the framers of the 1999 Constitution intentionally strengthened rights protections to prevent a return to authoritarian rule.
He also cited landmark court cases, including Arthur Nwankwo v State, Tony Momoh v Senate, and ECOWAS rulings in SERAP v Nigeria and Laws and Rights Awareness Initiative v FRN, which he said clearly prohibit the criminalisation of criticism of public officials.
Falana condemned the continued arrests of journalists and activists, including those detained during the #EndBadGovernance protests of August 2025, saying the pattern shows that repression remains entrenched in Nigeria’s security architecture.
He concluded by warning that Nigeria must not criminalise speech “unknown to law,” invoking the principle in Aoko v Fagbemi, and urged full compliance by law enforcement agencies with constitutional provisions and binding judicial decisions.
