The President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Afam Osigwe, SAN, has spoken out about what he sees as the deliberate misuse of the Cybercrimes Act to suppress free expression in Nigeria.
In an interview on ARISE Television’s Prime Time programme, he warned that the law, intended to tackle cybercrime and defamation, is increasingly being weaponised against critics, journalists, activists, and ordinary citizens who dare to voice dissent.
Courts Allegedly Becoming Tools for Oppression
According to Osigwe, many individuals are being charged, investigated, or detained under allegations of cybercrime or criminal defamation — even in cases where such offences are normally bailable.
He expressed concern that judges and magistrates, instead of acting independently, are sometimes acting as instruments of political power.
“Even when the matters are ordinarily bailable, judges and magistrates are increasingly appearing to be tools in the hands of politicians and ‘big men’ and refuse bail even where there is no basis for not granting bail,” Osigwe said.
He described this trend as turning the courts into an “oppressive tool,” warning that when public office holders prevent citizens from criticising them without challenge, democracy itself suffers.
Threats to Freedom of Expression
The NBA president stressed that this practice represents a direct violation of the right to freedom of expression and an abuse of democratic space.
“If our judges become willing tools in giving them that which they desire, which is to put those people out of circulation, then there’s something wrong and the judiciary becomes a willing tool in the hands of the oppressors and thereby becomes an oppressor itself,” he said.
The underlying concern, Osigwe added, is that public officials should be held to high standards of accountability.
When citizens cannot question or criticise those in power without fear of punitive legal action, the democratic process is undermined.
Context of the Cybercrimes Act
The Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act was first enacted in 2015 and amended in 2024 to address online fraud, cyberterrorism, and other digital offences.
While its intent is to combat genuine cybercrime, critics argue that some provisions — particularly those criminalising “cyberstalking” — are vaguely worded and open to abuse.
Observers note that journalists, activists, and whistleblowers have increasingly been targeted under these provisions, raising concerns about the chilling effect on investigative reporting, activism, and public debate.
Experts Weigh In
Legal experts and civil society groups have voiced similar concerns, arguing that the law’s vague language allows authorities to stretch definitions and punish dissent.
The misuse of such laws, they contend, risks eroding civil liberties, stifling innovation, and weakening trust in the judicial system.
What’s Next?
The ongoing debates around the Cybercrimes Act suggest that reform may be necessary to balance online security with constitutional rights.
Stakeholders are calling for clearer definitions, stricter safeguards, and mechanisms to protect freedom of expression while still tackling genuine cybercrime.
Public consultations and legal reviews could be the next steps in addressing these challenges and ensuring that the law serves justice rather than political interests.
Summary
Afam Osigwe, SAN, President of the Nigerian Bar Association, has raised concerns about the misuse of the Cybercrimes Act in Nigeria, claiming it is being weaponised to suppress free speech and dissent.
Individuals, including journalists and activists, are reportedly charged or detained under the Act, even in cases that are normally bailable.
Osigwe warned that the judiciary is sometimes complicit, turning courts into tools for political oppression.
Critics argue that vague provisions of the 2015 Act, amended in 2024, are being exploited, highlighting the need for reforms to protect freedom of expression while combating genuine cybercrime.
