Freedom of speech is a constitutionally guaranteed right in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and this right ought to be protected. However, the recent call to regulate social media has met with mixed reactions among legal practitioners, writes Onozure Dania
On February 8, 2024, President Bola Tinubu’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, said social media has become a societal menace, as he stated that users spread misinformation on social media platforms, hence the urgent need for regulation. The call, however, met with fierce opposition from various critics.
Gbajabiamila said this when he represented the President at the public presentation of a book titled, Nigerian Public Discourse: The Interplay of Empirical Evidence and Hyperbole, written by a former Minister of Works and Housing, Babatunde Fashola, in Lagos.
According to a statement by Tunde Alao, the Senior Special Assistant to Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu (Media), Office of the Lagos State Deputy Governor, Gbajabiamila was quoted as saying, “Social media has become a societal menace and must be regulated. Many people do not understand that once the send button is hit, there is a potential to reach millions of people around the world, which is capable of causing great danger not just in society but even unintended consequences to the individuals who are receiving information that may include security of life.”
But this is not the first time the call to regulate social media has come up in Nigeria. Gbajabiamila, who was the Speaker of the House of Representatives during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, said on June 28, 2021, that social media must be regulated to prevent its “evil from taking root in the country.” He said the National Assembly had been considering regulating social media for a long time but was reluctant due to outcries by Nigerians.
While acknowledging the good of the platforms, he noted that social media is “the most potent weapon for good and evil.” Gbajabimaila disclosed this at the ‘Mr Speaker Chat with Young Nigerians,’ a programme held on Channels TV.
On June 4, 2021, the federal government announced the suspension of the operation of Twitter (now X) in Nigeria. The move by the government came a few days after the microblogging site pulled down a tweet by President Buhari.
Some members of the then committee who openly endorsed the ban were Fatuhu Mahammad, the lawmaker representing Daura Federal Constituency of Katsina State, where Buhari hails from, who openly canvassed the regulation of social media at the hearing; and the former Minister of Information and Culture, Mr Lai Mohammed, who, before the joint committee, gave the laws backing the action of the government to suspend Twitter.
Gbajabiamila said, “Social media is the most potent weapon for good and for evil. While we welcome the good, we must prepare for the evil. You cannot use the idea of free speech to destroy me.
“Most democracies in the world today are making efforts to regulate social media, and the National Assembly has been considering regulating social media for a long time. But each time the issue comes up, Nigerians kick against it. It is something we need to do because we have a responsibility to protect every single citizen in this country, and that is what we must do.”
The former Speaker said that though the lawmakers were elected by the people and should be on the side of the people, the House must listen to all sides on the matter.
He said, “We are elected by the people to represent them, and ordinarily, we should be on their side. But this is not a beauty contest. You must listen to all sides. The government says Twitter poses a threat to national security. What is the information available to them that we are not privy to?
“They have also said that it is not about the President’s tweet, which was taken down, but a mere coincidence. We are listening to the government because we have heard from the people.
“We agree that there is freedom of speech, but the government is saying that freedom is not absolute. Even at that, the freedom can be protected, but not at the instance of the country.”
At the 8th Assembly, the ‘Prohibit Frivolous Petitions and Other Matters Connected Therewith Bill’ was sponsored by Bala Na’Allah, a senator from Kebbi State. The Bill was, however, challenged by Nigerians with the hashtag #Notosocialmediabill. The Bill scaled second reading but did not make it beyond that. In 2019, another proposed Bill, the “Internet Falsehood and Manipulation Bill 2019,” was introduced to the Senate by Sani Musa, a senator from Niger State.
Social media restrictions have become a rising trend, with a total of 66 countries worldwide recording cases after the Egyptian government enforced an internet blackout back in 2011. Internet censorship has also become rampant worldwide, especially in Asian and African countries.
In 2021 alone, there were at least eight political cases of internet disruption across the world, including in Nigeria, Uganda, Russia, Myanmar, Senegal, Chad, the Republic of Congo, and Bangladesh.
These governments usually go after communication apps like WhatsApp, Skype, Facebook Messenger, Viber, and social media platforms such as Facebook, X, and Instagram.
However, the recent call to regulate social media by the federal government of Nigeria was met with mixed feelings. While some welcomed the idea, others criticised it.
Reacting to Gbajabiamila’s call for social media regulation, human rights organisation Amnesty International condemned the proposed regulation, saying the government could jail its critics for three years if such becomes a law. The organisation also stated that the government could shut down the internet or limit access if it succeeds in regulating social media.
Amnesty International made this known in a series of tweets on its X account on Saturday. It said, “The social media regulation law keenly pushed by Nigerian politicians is set to be subject to vague and broad interpretations and will impose incredibly harsh punishments simply for criticising the authorities.
“Social media users will be punished for freely expressing their opinions. The government can arbitrarily shut down the internet and limit access to social media. Criticising the government will be punishable with penalties of up to three years in prison.”
But a professor of law, Sam Erugo (SAN), supported the call to regulate social media, saying that as much as social media has enhanced information sharing and ostensibly access to and freedom of information, “we have also witnessed gross and unacceptable abuse of the freedom and opportunities provided by social media.”
Erugo said, “I agree that there is a need to regulate social media; there should be no argument about that. Much as social media has enhanced information sharing and ostensibly access to and freedom of information, we have also witnessed gross and unacceptable abuse of the freedom and opportunities provided by social media.
“It must be recalled that no right is absolute, and freedom unrestrained could lead to anarchy. In our society, rather unfortunately, most people want to be forced or coerced to obey common reason.
“In the case of social media, the situation is alarming how some people write and publish without regard to ethics or morally acceptable limits.”
Erugo explained that the essence of regulation of social media should be to create a balance between access to and freedom of information and the rights of others and society itself to be protected from abuse.
“There is nothing wrong with regulation except that citizens have become wary of governmental actions. In this case, the feeling is that government regulation could be discriminatory and targeted at political enemies.
“Recent experience is noteworthy, but power is transient, and both the executive and the legislature should be reminded that any bad law today could hunt them sooner or later. Consequently, my humble opinion is in support of the regulation of social media,” he said.
Another senior lawyer, Wahab Shittu (SAN), who also supported the call, said the importance of the regulation of social media could not be overemphasised.
According to him, social media has both positive and negative sides. One of the negative sides is the danger of abuse and the inclination to promote fake news capable of endangering the health and safety of society.
“The key to retaining its positive impact and forestalling the possibility of its abuse, which is real, is regulation,” he added.
In his view, another lawyer, Dr Yemi Omodele, who also said he supports the regulation of social media, noted that such regulation must, however, be guided by law, adding that there was already a law guiding communication in the country.
Omodele stated that when it comes to fake news, there is a law to that effect, saying that if one looks at it critically, the idea of fake news in the country is being projected by social media platforms.
According to the lawyer, social media platforms are used to carry out “what we call fake news. You find it difficult for a newspaper like The PUNCH, the Guardian, ThisDay, and the rest to carry fake news.”
“It is not out of place. Because once there is a law in respect of an act, there must be a person who will commit an offence and who will violate such a law. And where there is no law, there is no sin.
“So if there is law, there must be sin. And where there is sin, there is God. The sinner must be allowed to face the wrath of the law.
“However, looking at it from the angle of the fundamental right to expression, the citizens of this country are at liberty to enjoy their fundamental right.
“But where somebody’s fundamental right reaches or stops, another man’s fundamental right starts from there,” he said.
Omodele further stated that one would not say that because there is the fundamental right of freedom of expression, association, and assembly, then one would now cause commotion in the country.
However, another lawyer and the convener of Concerned Nigerians, Deji Adeyanju, condemned the call and asked Gbajabiamila to drop his quest to regulate social media.
Adeyanju said the call negates the principles of freedom of speech upon which Nigeria’s democracy is built.
In a statement conveying his reaction to Gbajabiamila’s position on the matter, the activist said that even though the Chief of Staff has been a target of fake news peddlers in recent times, the Nigerian constitution permits divergent opinions and criticisms on issues of national importance.
He said, “While I recognise the fact that Mr Femi Gbajabiamila has, in recent times, been at the receiving end of fake news, targeted harassment, and baseless corruption allegations, it must, however, be noted that the call for regulation of social media negates the principles of freedom of speech upon which our democratic nation is built.
“Needless to say, freedom of speech is a constitutionally guaranteed right enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and this right ought to be protected because it permits divergent opinions and criticisms on critical national issues.”
Adeyanju added that it was ironic that the Chief of Staff, whose political party rode to power using social media, now seeks to regulate the platforms.
He said, “Even more ironic is the fact that the APC government, where Femi Gbajabiamila presently holds a key position, rode onto power under the back of social media.
“It is, therefore, disheartening that Femi Gbajabiamila is now seeking to regulate social media to protect himself from criticism! I recall Femi Gbajabiamila’s persistent criticisms of the government of the day in 2014, where he, among others, described the government as ‘vagabonds in power and barbarians at the gate.’”
He stressed that, despite some of the ills that may be associated with social media, the platform has served as a tool for citizens to easily reach government officials who were hitherto unreachable and hold them accountable. He posited that it is the free and easy access to politicians and government officials that the Chief of Staff seeks to shut down.
“I, therefore, call on the President’s Chief of Staff to banish any thought of regulating social media or infringing on the citizens’ right to freedom of expression but commit to protecting the civic space and freedom of speech as he holds a vital position to do so.
“There are existing remedies available to anyone who has been subjected to social media harassment or defamation. If Gbajabiamila feels aggrieved, he should invoke the available legal remedies instead of seeking to create ‘a nebulous regulation of social media,’” Adeyanju said.