₦airaland Forum

SHOCKER OF ALL SHOCKERS!!! :THE MAIN PROVISION OF THE SOCIAL MEDIA GAG BILL HAS ACTUALLY BEEN ENACTED AS PART OF CYBER CRIME LAW BY JONATHAN GOVT SINCE MAY 15TH, 2015!
While we are all fighting and fretting about the proposed social media bill we actually need to be fighting for the REPEAL or amendment of S. 24 of the CYBER CRIME BILL OF 2015 ALREADY signed into law by President Jonathan Goodluck in May 15 just before he handed over.
Believe it or not, section 24 of the Cyber Crime Law is actually much worse than the Social Media Bill we are all shouting about.
Here is what S 24 of the CYBER CRIME ACT which is already LAW says: 'Any person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer that is 1. Grossly offensive, Indecency graphic or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character or causes any such message or matter to be sent or b. knows to be false for the purpose of causing ANNOYANCE INCONVENIENCE, DANGER, OBSTRUCTION, INJURY, CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION, ENMITY, HATRED, ILL WILL OR NEEDLESS ANXIETY to another or who causes such message to be sent commits an offense under this Act and shall on conviction be fined not more than N7, 000,000 or imprisonment for 3years or both.
My people this CYBER CRIME ACT is 5 times worse than the proposed Social Media Bill o and we need to be focusing on that one too for an ammendment or repeal of this section 24
As a matter of fact one journalist is already being tried under the the CYBER CRIME LAW as we speak: Seun Oloketuyi.

really?I hope you are not trying deceive yourself? or are you APC member?

Billygee2u:
really?I hope you are not trying deceive yourself? or are you APC member?

Thank God you can make research yourself.......

You see how Nigerian lawmakers make with clear lope holes? This law was signed in 2015 and they make reference to computer, not realizing that they are smart devices that can be used as well.

This is to show how our laws are made with so many lope holes for people to exploit

Cyber crime act and Social Media Bill are not the same thing. The Cyber Crime Act is almost equivalent to the Social media act in UK.

Read the text of this Social Media bill and you will understand that.

nobilis:
Cyber crime act and Social Media Bill are not the same thing. The Cyber Crime Act is almost equivalent to the Social media act in UK.

Read the text of this Social Media bill and you will understand that.

Can you make things clearer?

Mlaide:
Can you make things clearer?

Cool.
I don't want to go deeply into it but let me just give a sketch.
Everyone knows that slander and libel are criminal offences.
But before the cyber crime act came into play, there was no specific punishment meant for it.

What Jonathan's Cyber Crime Act did was to specify the type of punishment to be meted out to someone found guilty of a cyber crime.

Jonathan's cyber crime act never said a person must be very sure of what he was saying before saying it. It never said you should get an affidavit before making a statement on social media. In other words, you're free to say whatever u want to say but if it brought against you, in a court of law, that what you said is false, then you shall be jailed or fined.

This is equivalent to the Social Media Act of the UK and the Defamation Laws of the US.

Now, this Social media bill prohibits you from writing anything without an affidavit. If, for example, you're an eye witness to an event, u're not allowed to report it without an affidavit. If u have a piece of news to report and the court refuses to give you an affidavit, u dare not report it.

Do not forget that journalism isn't only about writing happening or past events. Journalism is also allowed to make speculations about the future. Journalism is also allowed to make extrapolations. Journalism is also allowed to make guesses. It is these things that force the people concerned to come out and clarify issues.

It is that way everywhere in the world. In no sane country has anybody been asked to get an affidavit before making a post.

Are you cleared now?

nobilis:
Cool.
I don't want to go deeply into it but let me just give a sketch.
Everyone knows that slander and libel are criminal offences.
But before the cyber crime act came into play, there was no specific punishment meant for it.

What Jonathan's Cyber Crime Act did was to specify the type of punishment to be meted out to someone found guilty of a cyber crime.

Jonathan's cyber crime act never said a person must be very sure of what he was saying before saying it. It never said you should get an affidavit before making a statement on social media. In other words, you're free to say whatever u want to say but if it brought against you, in a court of law, that what you said is false, then you shall be jailed or fined.

This is equivalent to the Social Media Act of the UK and the Defamation Laws of the US.

Now, this Social media bill prohibits you from writing anything without an affidavit. If, for example, you're an eye witness to an event, u're not allowed to report it without an affidavit. If u have a piece of news to report and the court refuses to give you an affidavit, u dare not report it.

Do not forget that journalism isn't only about writing happening or past events. Journalism is also allowed to make speculations about the future. Journalism is also allowed to make extrapolations. Journalism is also allowed to make guesses. It is these things that force the people concerned to come out and clarify issues.

It is that way everywhere in the world. In no sane country has anybody been asked to get an affidavit before making a post.

Are you cleared now?

Hmmmmm....... Oga oo