₦airaland Forum

I strongly urge ALL who write opinions online in this forum, or any other Nigerian-themed discussion forum, to watch this video clip about the new cybercrimes law that has quietly gone into effect this year 2025.

While penalties of 2 to 15 years in jail await to penalize people convicted of impersonation, hacking, falsification and wire fraud, the most alarming provisions of this law stipulate LIFE jail sentences for anyone who advocates in any online forum that the Nigerian federation should be partitioned for whatever reason.

This life sentence that ANYONE could now face for online separatist discussion, is the first of its kind to make its way into enforceable law for Nigeria, but the perils of this law don't end there. Stiff jail sentences await people who write opinions deemed to be defamatory or misleading by the powers that be, and it is such ambiguous phraseology found in this new Nigerian Cyber Crimes law of 2025, which holds the potential to jail almost anyone with an opinion to offer on any subject relating to powerful people or entities in Nigeria.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE0QH1Pe3QY

The law is unconstitutional.

I wonder who advised them to draft such. Supreme court will destroy such law .

jmoore:
The law is unconstitutional.

I wonder who advised them to draft such. Supreme court will destroy such law .

I hope you are right in this assumption that this new law is yet to be debated by the Supreme Court, because if it has been implemented already as suggested by this video clip, the government will have assumed the power to lock up virtually anyone who expresses any unfavorable opinion in any online forum such as this one.

Jakumo:
I hope you are right in this assumption that this new law is yet to be debated by the Supreme Court, because if it has been implemented already as suggested by this video clip, the government will have assumed the power to lock up virtually anyone who expresses any unfavorable opinion in any online forum such as this one.

Opinions should not just be opinions, opinions should be made based on facts and should also be expressed in a very civil manner that is constructive intented to make correction.

Softmirror:
Opinions should not just be opinions, opinions should be made based on facts and should also be expressed in a very civil manner that is constructive intented to make correction.

The definition of what "facts" are, is not always clear-cut, and is open to variable interpretation. For example, one report claims 27 people lost their lives in a recent northern Nigeria mosque attack by terrorists, while the death toll in the same incident might be reported as 33 people by yet another news outlet.

There is no way of telling which of those two figures is "the truth", but that ambiguity should not be allowed to become the basis for prosecuting any writer who goes online to assign blame for the insecurity in that area to government officials who funded the unlawful immigration and arming of gunmen from Niger, Libya, or Chad, to suppress their opposition followers during election season.

The wording of the new law also places discussion forum website operators such as our Oga Seun in grave danger BECAUSE this new law attempts to hold forum operators, and even WhatsApp chat group administrators, legally liable and culpable for ANYTHING written by total strangers in their website's discussion forum. Anyone complaining about the new more aggressive spam bot now prowling the Nairaland forum can better understand why this rigorous self-censorship is a matter of life and liberty for website owners who must remain on the right side of changing laws in Nigeria.

Jakumo:
The definition of what "facts" are, is not always clear-cut, and is open to variable interpretation. For example, one report claims 27 people lost their lives in a recent northern Nigeria mosque attack by terrorists, while the death toll in the same incident might be reported as 33 people by yet another news outlet.

There is no way of telling which of those two figures is "the truth", but that ambiguity should not be allowed to become the basis for prosecuting any writer who goes online to assign blame for the insecurity in that area to government officials who funded the unlawful immigration and arming of gunmen from Nigeria or Chad, to suppress their opposition followers during election season.

The wording of the new law also places discussion forum website operators such as our Oga Seun in grave danger BECAUSE this new law attempts to hold forum operators, and even WhatsApp chat group administrators, legally liable and culpable for ANYTHING written by total strangers in their website's discussion forum. Anyone complaining about the new more aggressive spam bot now prowling the Nairaland forum can better understand why this rigorous self-censorship is a matter of life and liberty for website owners who must remain on the right side of changing laws in Nigeria.

Is this a FACT below. If it is not what is it?!

Softmirror:
Is this a FACT below. If it is not what is it?!

I fail to recognize how this rather dated letter is relevant to this discussion of press freedom and freedom of speech.

Jakumo:
I fail to recognize how this rather dated letter is relevant to this discussion of press freedom and freedom of speech.

Is it a fact or not?! You are running away. When I said opinions should be backed by facts I know what I am talking about.

Softmirror:
Is it a fact or not?! You are running away. When I said opinions should be backed by facts I know what I am talking about.

Frankly I do not understand your question in the slightest. Anyway I do thank you for this input, and maybe with further study of your responses, I will be in a better position to offer a rejoinder that will meet with your approval.

In the meantime I also look forward to hearing from other Nairaland writers, regarding how this new press law will affect their future conduct as online opinion commentators, bearing in mind the greatly broadened scope of what can now be construed as illegal expressions of opinion.

Jakumo:
Frankly I do not understand your question in the slightest. Anyway I do thank you for this input, and maybe with further study of your responses, I will be in a better position to offer a rejoinder that will meet with your approval.

In the meantime I also look forward to hearing from other Nairaland writers, regarding how this new press law will affect their future conduct as online opinion commentators, bearing in mind the greatly broadened scope of what can now be construed as illegal expressions of opinion.

You can see how insincere you are. There is absolutely nothing wrong with expressing one's opinion, criticism on social media in a clear cut constructive way.

Softmirror:
You can see how insincere you are. There is absolutely nothing wrong with expressing one's opinion, criticism on social media in a clear cut constructive way.

Ok, now I understand your point. We are in agreement that free speech is the cornerstone of electoral democracy's immutable rights.

Jakumo:
Ok, now I understand your point. We are in agreement that free speech is the cornerstone of electoral democracy's immutable rights.

Free speech has limitations even in the United States of America. You can't use your social media handle to be threatening the government without suffering the consequences. Just like Nnamdi Kanu is facing the consequences of his speeches.

The issuance of death threats to a president or any other person is clearly a criminal offence, as has been the case even before the internet became the primary means of communication. Nnamdi Kanu, who armed and instigated illegal militias to attack his own Igbo people and prevent them from leaving their homes, is where he belongs to be, which is behind bars, just as is Simon Ekpa, who called for bloodshed from Finland, where he wrongly assumed that he was beyond the reach of the law.


That said, the fine print of this new press law goes far beyond the recommendation that death threats and genocide instigation merit criminal prosecution. Now, with this new law, any opinion written online that is merely uncomfortable to hear or offensive to powerful people, can theoretically become the basis not just for a libel or defamation lawsuit aimed at the writer, but could become a criminal count that could send ANY person to jail FOR LIFE.

This erosion of freedom of speech may be gradual at first, to the point of being initially imperceptible to many, BUT once doors start being kicked down over mere opinions written online that defame but do not incite, it may be too late for a repeal of the aspects of this law that lend themselves to abuse by rogue elements within the administration of government at any level.

Meaning before the 2027 election, reasonable number of the noise makers might spend their time behind the bars

Jakumo:
Ok, now I understand your point. We are in agreement that free speech is the cornerstone of electoral democracy's immutable rights.

There is freedom of speech, but reckless speech is not part of the freedom

helinues:
There is freedom of speech, but reckless speech is not part of the freedom

\

Oh yes I agree with this statement. Nnamdi Kanu and Simon Ekpa both abused freedom of speech,. and are now languishing behind bars where they belong for life, as a result.

However, If you read the fine print of the new law, you will see that even those who merely say things deemed subjectively to be "offensive", "inappropriate", "annoying", and so on, could in theory lead to prosecution and LIFE behind bars.

Jakumo:
\

Oh yes I agree with this statement. Nnamdi Kanu and Simon Ekpa both abused freedom of speech,. and are now languishing behind bars where they belong for life, as a result.

However, If you read the fine print of the new law, you will see that even those who merely say things deemed subjectively to be "offensive", "inappropriate", "annoying", and so on, could in theory lead to prosecution and LIFE behind bars.

Of course, those behind the law would take some advantages in prosecuting their perceived enemies even when their comments don't warrant prosecution

helinues:
Of course, those behind the law would take some advantages in prosecuting their perceived enemies even when their comments don't warrant prosecution

This is the hidden point that I seek to highlight. This law is a blunt instrument that will hit both legitimate targets and innocent parties with equal force and consequences.

jmoore:
The law is unconstitutional.

I wonder who advised them to draft such. Supreme court will destroy such law .

The law is constitutional

Azikiwe made sure one Nigeria was
unbreakable perpetually in the constitution

Softmirror:
Opinions should not just be opinions, opinions should be made based on facts and should also be expressed in a very civil manner that is constructive intented to make correction.

I would advise you to carefully consider what you are supporting. The man currently presiding in Abuja protested precisely against the kind of Draconian and asinine edict being discussed here. It is clear that those who throw stones now inhabit a glass house; therefore, they abhor these same stones.

We are free citizens of our country, not slaves. Legislation designed to gag citizens and muzzle dissent when your leadership has failed should be considered treason. Sadly, even the Supreme Court has been bought at the political bazaar.

christistruth01:
The law is constitutional

Azikiwe made sure one Nigeria was
unbreakable perpetually in the constitution

You know nothing about the constitution.

Softmirror:
Is this a FACT below. If it is not what is it?!

How does this letter address the concerns @Jakumo raised?

ottersberger:
I would advise you to carefully consider what you are supporting. The man currently presiding in Abuja protested precisely against the kind of Draconian and asinine edict being discussed here. It is clear that those who throw stones now inhabit a glass house and abhor these same stones.

We are free citizens of our country, not slaves. Legislation designed to gag citizens and muzzle dissent when your leadership has failed should be considered treason. Sadly, even the Supreme Court has been bought at the political bazaar.

The point you've made here is precisely the aspect of this new law that I am seeking to highlight. There are categories of true cyber crime online offences such as hacking for financial gain, online scams for financial gain, and online impersonation in furtherance of accruing illicit financial gain for mischievous or malicious purposes, for which this law rightly prescribes jail sentences of between 5 and 15 years.

The easily overlooked point, however, is that deeper in the text of the same law's itemized list of offenses, are NON cyber crime infractions such as online mockery or the expression of debatable opinions about public figures, that are ALSO lumped together with far more grievous financial crimes perpetrated by means deception online, and that is what could lead to a lot of outspoken but law-abiding citizens of Nigeria finding themselves faced with the prospect of LIFE sentences in jail because they wrote an opinion that offended someone who is aligned with the powers that be.

Softmirror:
Is this a FACT below. If it is not what is it?!

How does this letter address the concerns @Jakumo raised?

If his interpretation of the law he quoted is correct - note that I have not read it myself - surely, we all need to be alarmed by its blatant overreach as well as the excessive penalties it prescribes.

We model our nation's imperfect democracy on the United States' and United Kingdom's. Yet in both these countries, people do not go to jail simply for arguing a case for secession or republicanism. Why is it that neither you nor @helinues appear to be remotely pertubed by what appears to be a draconian law, even though you know damn well that it infringes on our civil liberties. Are you so blinded by party loyalty that your critical thinking skills have been completely eroded?

jmoore:
You know nothing about the constitution.

Succession or advocating for it is unconstitutional

Azikiwe saw to that

DaddyJapan:
How does this letter address the concerns @Jakumo raised?

If his interpretation of the law he quoted is correct - note that I have not read it myself - surely, we all need to be alarmed by its blatant overreach as well as the excessive penalties it prescribes.

We model our nation's imperfect democracy on the United States' and United Kingdom's. Yet in both these countries, people do not go to jail simply for arguing a case for secession or republicanism. Why is it that neither you nor @helinues appear to be remotely pertubed by what appears to be a draconian law, even though you know damn well that it infringes on our civil liberties. Are you so blinded by party loyalty that your critical thinking skills have been completely eroded?

This is the point that several of the previous respondents to this topic failed to grasp. The law, if not contested or modified to exclude ambiguous wording, has the potential to become a catch-all pretext to round up and jail for LIFE anyone whose online opinions ruffle feathers in high places, even if NO fraud or incitement to violence could reasonably be implied from such written opinions posted online.

helinues:
There is freedom of speech, but reckless speech is not part of the freedom

Does free speech include the right to insult a person. Mind you, I said insult. I didnt say defame.

Jakumo:
This is the point that several of the previous respondents to this topic failed to grasp. The law, if not contested or modified to exclude ambiguous wording, has the potential to become a catch-all pretext to round up and jail for LIFE anyone whose online opinions ruffle feathers in high places, even if NO fraud or incitement to violence could reasonably be implied from such written opinions posted online.

It is unconstitutional and must be contested before the courts.

DeepSight:
It is unconstitutional and must be contested before the courts.

It is reassuring to hear from a lawyer that this new law will still be subject to close scrutiny and possible amendment before its final version enters the lawbooks.

Jakumo:
It is reassuring to hear from a lawyer that this new law will still be subject to close scrutiny and possible amendment before its final version enters the lawbooks.

I said "must be" in the sense that that is what must happen in order for us to safeguard our freedoms. The sad reality is that already, such similar provisions of law have been weaponized to harrass, arrest and intimidate opposite voices.

This abominable and frightening pattern must be fiercely contested and struck down. However I must add that the courts are so cowed today, especially under the present dictatorship, that hope for that also wanes.

When you note that the Supreme Court was terrified of hearing a critical case on the illegal removal/ suspension of an entire elected government of a state - then you know that there is much to worry about.

All patriots however, must stand up and resist this attempt to transform this vibrant country into North Korea.

DaddyJapan:
How does this letter address the concerns @Jakumo raised?

If his interpretation of the law he quoted is correct - note that I have not read it myself - surely, we all need to be alarmed by its blatant overreach as well as the excessive penalties it prescribes.

We model our nation's imperfect democracy on the United States' and United Kingdom's. Yet in both these countries, people do not go to jail simply for arguing a case for secession or republicanism. Why is it that neither you nor @helinues appear to be remotely pertubed by what appears to be a draconian law, even though you know damn well that it infringes on our civil liberties. Are you so blinded by party loyalty that your critical thinking skills have been completely eroded?

Of course, those behind the law would take some advantages in prosecuting their perceived enemies even when their comments don't warrant prosecution

You guys should stop trolling me on this forum. I made the above quote on this same thread