On Wednesday, 2 December, 2015 would have been likened to every other day in the Senate, but a bill which seeks to to jail social media users, read for the second time on the floor of the Red Chamber altered everything.
It was one of the first businesses of the day and the Deputy Majority Leader of the Senate, Bala Ibn Na’ Allah (APC, Kebbi), dressed in his native ‘babariga’, shocked the world when he explained the contents of a bill he sponsored. It seeks for an Act to Prohibit Frivolous Petitions and Other Matters Connected Therewith (SB.143).
The bill is seeking a two-year jail term, with an option of N2 million fine for Nigerians who post “abusive statements” on the social media or write a frivolous petition against any public officers. According to the bill, it will be unlawful to submit any petition, statement intended to report the conduct of any person for the purpose of an investigation, inquiry without a duly sworn affidavit, confirming the content to be true and in accordance with the Oaths Act.
Similarly, any petition or complaints not accompanied by a sworn affidavit will be incompetent and cannot be used by any government institution, agency or bodies established by any law for the time being enforced in Nigeria. Any person who unlawfully uses, publishes or causes to be published any petition, complaint not supported by a duly sworn affidavit is liable to as much as two-year imprisonment and as high as N4 million in fines.
In the same vein, where an individual through a text message, tweets, WhatsApp or through any social media, post any abusive statement knowing same to be false with intent to set the public against any person or group of persons, an institution of government or such other bodies established by law will be guilty of an offence and liable to 2-years imprisonment or a fine of N2 million.
Explaining the dynamics of the Bill, Senator Na’Allah said: “Our past has portrayed us as a society where by the mere expedience of writing frivolous petition against public officials you can have their right abused by taking certain measures that practically took away their right of presumption of innocence only to be found later that the petition, as strong as it appears, on paper lacks merit.
“As a Nation with strong desire to move forward this negative trend must be reversed, if only the desired objectives of the present government is to be met. The Bill seeks to provide punishment for frivolous petitions by making sure that only credible and verifiable petitions are presented to the public. The utility of the Bill is to equally save the time for good governance and resources that go into investigating frivolous petitions.
“Distinguished Senators, the question to ask is whether having passed the Freedom of Information Act which gives unfettered access by the public information from government offices they would be right for this government to continue to waste valuable time and resources in investigating frivolous petitions from the same public and I am sure you would find no difficulty in saying no to the ugly situation.”
Barely 24 hours after the Bill scaled through second reading, the Senate again added more pains to injury last Thursday. The Senate president, Dr. Bukola Saraki, openly affirmed that the Red Chamber will not be blackmailed to jettison what he described as a Bill that would benefit Nigeria and Nigerians. His position was supported by his ‘right hand’ man, Senator Dino Melaye ( APC, Kogi West) .
Melaye had stated: “If there are no measures put in place, this particular SaharaReporters and others have the capacity to drag democracy into crisis because they have become very reclkless. They make laborious statements that have no content of fact at all and because of the Nigeria’s perception it is very important that we check their activities.
“While I celebrate the social media as major actors, this Senate should not be blackmailed or cowed because of the social media. You will read time innumerable, SaharaReporters casting aspersion on the integrity of the Senate. The Senate is a sacred hallowed chamber. The bill moved yesterday on frivolous petitions have been misconstrued by this same people and this Senate should not keep quiet because this can have a negative effect on the Nation. This SaharaReporters have commercialized their consciences and moneytised their operations and are now tools being used against perceived political enemies.
“SaharaReporters operate from New York and this Senate must write the US government to draw their attention to the clandestine operations of SaharaReporters.”
In his remark, the Leader of the Senate Ali Ndume reiterated that the activities of some social media operators were `getting out of hand’. “It is not only SaharaReporters; you have the privilege where people just wake up because of the advancement in ICT and start writing whatever without being held responsible.
“We are a law making body and we have a responsibility to make laws that hold people responsible for actions that they take. People should not just publicize anything without being held responsible,” he had said.
Soon after the story hit the social media, it went viral. Angry Nigerians who saw the move as a desperate attempt to gag the media and free speech have mounted unprecedented pressure on the Nigerian Senate to jettison the move. Prominent Nigerians who are worried that it will take the country back to the dark ages equally want the Bill to be stepped down.
The move, many believe, may further dent the already battered image of the Senate. Since its inauguration on the 9th of June, 2015, it has been enmeshed in series of controversies, with the corruption trial of its president, Saraki. Nigerians have since then viewed the Senate as an unserious body, whose interest is to satisfy the needs of its members above that of the nation.
That is not all. Nigerians have not forgotten so soon how the arrowheads supporting the bill benefited from the largesse of the social media before, during and after the last general elections in the country. For instance, Senator Melaye relied heavily on SaharaReporters, Premium Times and other blogs during his anti-corruption campaign days. When the administration of former president Goodluck Jonathan made attempts to gag the social media, Senator Melaye led other social media activists to kick against the move.
Similarly, the Senate President, Saraki still depends on the social media and frequently reaches out to his constituents through social media platforms. He has a unit in his media team specifically in charge of social media. At the end of every legislative sitting, Saraki’s media team relies on the social media to educate Nigerians on the goings-on in the Red Chamber. Observers and commentators are therefore surprised that the Senate would go all out to punish the media and social media users because of personal misgivings between some lawmakers and SaharaReporters.
Currently, Nigeria has a vibrant online community of over 48 million internet users. It has a rapidly growing social media users which has metamorphosed into the country’s most formidable political opposition to the government since the historic fuel subsidy protests in 2012. At least 7.1 million people use Facebook daily in Nigeria, making the country one Africa’s biggest users of the social media platform. Nigeria also has an active Twitter community and large number of users on other social media networks.
In the past, attempts have been made by the Nigerian government to restrict the use of the social media by coming up with stiff regulations. The move has always been met with stiff opposition from the masses who are quick to threaten that massive protests will be staged. This particular move, though targeted at SaharaReporters, observers believe it is a reminder of Decree 4 enacted during the military administration of President Muhammadu Buhari
In 1984, Buhari passed Decree Number 4, the Protection Against False Accusations Decree, considered by scholars as the most repressive press law ever enacted in Nigeria. Section 1 of the law provided that “Any person who publishes in any form, whether written or otherwise, any message, rumour, report or statement which is false in any material particular or which brings or is calculated to bring the Federal Military Government or the Government of a state or public officer to ridicule or disrepute, shall be guilty of an offense under this Decree”.
The law further stated that offending journalists and publishers will be tried by an open military tribunal, whose ruling would be final and unappealable in any court and those found guilty would be eligible for a fine not less than 10,000 naira and a jail sentence of up to two years. Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor of The Guardian were among the journalists who were tried under the decree.
In Africa, some countries have come up with similar laws and journalists have been jailed in the process, while discharging their lawful duties. For instance, Kenya’s National Assembly in 2013, passed a contentious anti-press legislation, the Kenya Information and Communication (Amendment) Act and the Media Council Act. Since its passage, it has effectively silenced critical reporting through a new government-controlled regulator and the threat of hefty fines.
The Kenya Information and Communication (Amendment) Act and the Media Council Act has now enabled a new government-controlled regulatory board to fine journalists up to 500,000 Kenyan shillings (US$5,500) and media companies up to 20 million shillings (US$230,000) if the board finds them in breach of a government-dictated code of conduct, to be penned by legislators.
Similar laws hold sway in Ethiopia, Angola and other African countries. China too falls within this category of countries that have suppressed the media. China’s constitution affords its citizens freedom of speech and press, but the opacity of Chinese media regulations allows authorities to crack down on news stories by claiming that they expose state secrets and endanger the country.
In May 2010, the government issued its first white paper on the Internet that emphasized the concept of “Internet sovereignty,” requiring all Internet users in China, including foreign organizations and individuals, to abide by Chinese laws and regulations. Chinese Internet companies are now required to sign the “Public Pledge on Self-Regulation and Professional Ethics for China Internet Industry,” which entails even stricter rules than those in the white paper, according to Jason Q. Ng, a specialist on Chinese media censorship and author of Blocked on Weibo.
There is another argument. Observers believe that the Bill, when passed into law, will conflict with an existing law which has already handled cyber related crimes. In January 2013, former president Goodluck Jonathan in a bill titled, “Cybercrime Bill, 2013”, which was routed through the former Senate President, David Mark, had urged members of the Upper Legislative Chamber to consider its enactment into law.
The bill introduced in July 28, 2011, was targeted at curbing the activities of internet scammers, who always give the country bad name, both locally and internationally.
The bill which was passed into law in October 2013, provides a legal framework for the prohibition and punishment of electronic fraud and cybercrime whilst promoting e-government services, electronic communications and transactions between public and private bodies as well as institutions and individuals. The law criminalises certain acts and omissions in line with regional and international best practices and provide procedural guidelines for the investigation of such offences.
It also defines the liability of service providers and ensures that national interest is not compromised by the use of electronic communications. Therefore, attempts by the current Senate to pass a similar bill into law is seen by Nigerians as an exercise in futility.
For now, the Senate leadership is silent on its next move regarding the proposed law. With the mounting opposition and opposition to the bill by some serving Senators, Nigerians are hopeful that the Senate may back pedal and jettison its current move.
0 comments :
Post a Comment