In the past few months, Twitter’s Indian rival, Koo, has started promoting it to Nigerians with the support of a powerful brand ambassador: President Muhammadu Buhari. The confirmation comes more than two months after Buhari banned Twitter from Nigeria in response to the social media company deleting a controversial tweet from Buhari threatening violence against supporters of a secessionist movement in the southeast.
Support for a particular media company is just the latest development in the government’s ongoing attempt to suppress freedom of expression.
More to:
Nigeria
Censorship and freedom of expression
media
Future of democracy
Africa southern of the Sahara
Last month, the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), the Nigerian media regulator, issued a letter to broadcasters in Nigeria asking them to downplay the deteriorating security situation in Nigeria, particularly the threats posed by Boko Haram and banditry. NBC justified its position by saying that reporting these issues tended to ignite more violence. This statement could well be justified if the government had not gradually scaled back freedom of expression. For example, last October, following the # EndSARS protests against police brutality, NBC fined media organizations for reporting the protests.
Nigeria ranks 120 on the World Press Freedom Index, a five-place drop from its 2020 ranking. Reporters Without Borders describes Nigeria as “one of the most dangerous and difficult countries in West Africa for journalists” and the situation appears to be getting worse.
Following the Twitter ban, NBC directed all social media platforms and online broadcast service providers operating in Nigeria to apply for a broadcast license. What followed was a controversial amendment to NBC law designed to stifle media organizations. These actions have sparked massive protests at all major media outlets in Nigeria, with each branch posting a front page ad fighting against inappropriate media regulation in the country.
In a political environment in which the government has shown its propensity for dictatorial action, restrictions on freedom of expression pose major challenges for civil society. Failure to freely report the news could result in the government controlling what is considered fact or fiction. This has dire consequences, especially for a country facing the greatest security challenges since the 1967 civil war.
For over a decade, Nigeria’s northeast region has been the scene of an uprising that has resulted in the deaths of more than 40,000 people and the displacement of more than two million people. The region still suffers from the devastating effects of this conflict, particularly on women, children and other vulnerable groups. Meanwhile, the north-west of the country is confronted with rampant banditry: More than two thousand people have been kidnapped since January, including hundreds of school children. Continuous reporting on these conflicts provides citizens with information about their severity and their impact on their fellow citizens. With this information, people can put pressure on their government to better face the uncertainty. Measures to minimize reporting on conflict situations in the country silence millions of victims who otherwise have no way of being heard at national level and downplay their suffering to save the government from embarrassment.
More to:
Nigeria
Censorship and freedom of expression
media
Future of democracy
Africa southern of the Sahara
The Buhari government’s inability to contain the country’s insecurity is only getting worse. The call for self-determination is growing in the south-west; the southeast is on the verge of an uprising led by supporters of a renewed Biafran separatist movement. The repression of Nigerian media seems like a desperate attempt to keep Nigerians in the dark about how little the government has been able to deliver on its promises to contain uncertainty.
If the government succeeds in its recent assault on freedom of the press, there is no reason to believe it will stop anytime soon. In the two years leading up to the general election, laws and regulations restricting the media could prevent coverage of election irregularities – especially if committed by the ruling party. Some people have argued that the increased focus on restricting freedom of expression is part of the ruling party’s plan to take hold of power ahead of the general election.
Many government supporters have argued that inappropriate coverage of conflict news – both on social and mainstream media – could exacerbate deep divisions in the country and then lead people to legislate. While this is a potential risk, it should be noted that the country has already passed laws to address this risk and punish criminals. For example the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act (2015) [PDF] addresses threats to cyberspace, including internet use and security, with a view to preventing and fighting cybercrime. The Defamatory and Offensive Publications Act (1966) also serves to criminalize libel. The government should focus on enforcing these laws rather than constantly gnawing at press freedom.
In his inaugural speech in 2015, President Buhari declared that democracy was the chosen route to national development and promised to “work consciously on the democratic system”. Safeguarding freedom of speech and guaranteeing fundamental freedoms are the tasks of a democratic government. It is important that the government strive to meet this responsibility.
This publication is part of the Diamonstein Spielvogel project on the future of democracy.
Comments are closed.