Buhari’s government dragged to ECOWAS court over attacks on journalists and bloggers Updated for 2021

82,096FansLike
2,966FollowersFollow
2,700SubscribersSubscribe
82,096FansLike
3,122FollowersFollow
2,700SubscribersSubscribe

Updated: March 5, 2021


The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project has dragged the federal government and state governments in Nigeria to ECOWAS Court of Justice in Abuja over “the frequent and repressive application of the Cybercrime Act to harass, intimidate, arbitrarily arrest, detain, and unfairly prosecute anyone found publishing views or facts perceived to be critical of the government at the federal and state levels and government officials.”

In the suit number ECW/CCJ/APP/09/19 filed last week at the ECOWAS Court, SERAP is arguing that: “The Federal Government and several state governments and their agents have trampled on the rights to freedom of expression and information of bloggers, journalists, activists, and social media users through the repressive use and implementation of the vaguely worded provisions of the Cybercrime Act.”
The suit filed on SERAP’s behalf by its Solicitor Femi Falana, SAN states: “The fundamental question for the court is whether the federal and state governments, by using and applying the Cybercrime Act and other similar laws on cyberstalking and sedition to prosecute journalists, bloggers and activists over perceived critical views, violate the rights to freedom of expression and access to information. SERAP submits that, under international freedom of expression jurisprudence, the answer is YES.”

[read_more id="2" more="Read full article" less="Read less"]

The suit read in part: “The idea of a democracy is that the people are encouraged to express their criticisms, even their wrong-headed criticisms, of elected government officials, in the expectation that this process will improve the process of government. In circumstances of public debate concerning public figures in the political domain and public institutions, the value placed by legal principles and jurisprudence upon uninhibited expression is particularly high.” 

“The systematic and persistent use of the Cybercrime Act and other similar laws on alleged cyberstalking to prosecute and imprison journalists, bloggers and activists for their criticism of public officials runs afoul of freedom of expression principles, namely: that criminal prosecutions against journalists and bloggers is never an appropriate remedy for alleged defamation of government officials, and that  news reporting about government officials are matters of public interest, which should be accorded heightened protection.”

“Sanctions for defamation should not be so large as to exert a chilling effect on freedom of opinion, expression and media freedom; penal sanctions, in particular imprisonment, should never be applied. This implies a free press and other media able to comment on public issues without censorship or restraint and to inform public opinion. The public also has a corresponding right to receive output.”

“Section 24 of the Cybercrime Act which provides for the offence of cyberstalking has been severally used and applied by the Defendant and its agents and several state governments across the country in molesting, intimidating, harassing and witch-hunting anyone found publishing views or facts deemed critical of government and/or government officials.”
“The vaguely worded offence of cyberstalking as stated in the Cybercrime Act is accorded a wide interpretation that extends to factual and true reports by activists, journalists, social media users and bloggers, thereby leaving a chilling effect on the rights to freedom of expression and information and media freedom and on citizens’ participation in the fight against corruption.”

“The abusive and repressive use of the vaguely worded provisions of the Cybercrime Act to stifle and muzzle perceived critics, journalists, bloggers and other media practitioners is an affront and it is dangerous to the rule of law and protection of the human rights of people.”

“Stories published online have been deemed ‘offensive’, ‘obstructive’, ‘insulting’ or ‘annoying’ with actionable consequence under section 24 of the Act even when the stories are true, correct and factual. Some stories published through traditional media outlets (print and electronic) that were never sanctioned by the government have been sanctioned by the same government upon being republished through online platforms.”

“SERAP chronologically highlights in this suit some of the high-profile cases of harassment, intimidation, arrest, unlawful detention, prosecution and imprisonment of journalists, bloggers, and activists for alleged cyberstalking.”

[/read_more]

Today News Africa
Today News Africahttps://todaynewsafrica.com
Today News Africa is a US-based international news organization focused on US-Africa policy and breaking news. Our goal is to provide truthful and exclusive stories to a diverse audience across North America and the African Continent. Subscribe to our news page at https://todaynewsafrica.com/ and Follow us on Twitter @todaynewsafrica

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Trending Now

TRENDING

Confidential U.S. government report concludes Ethiopia Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed leading ethnic cleansing in Tigray region

A confidential U.S. government report has concluded that the government of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in Ethiopia along with allied militia fighters are leading a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing in Tigray."Whole villages were severely damaged or completely erased," the report, first obtained by The New York Times, says.It adds that fighters from the neighboring Amhara region of Ethiopia who moved to Tigray...

Stay connected

[/read_more]

[read_more id="2" more="Read full article" less="Read less"]

error: Alert: Content is protected !!
Share
Tweet
Reddit
Pocket
Share
More