The social media became a valuable tool for politicians during the campaign that preceded the last general elections. But in a twist of events, the same tool is now being hounded by politicians amid public outcry, GBENRO ADEOYEwrites
Politicians have become ardent users of the social media in Nigeria and the ruling All Progressives Congress can be said to the biggest beneficiary in recent time.
The party’s victory at the last presidential election is a testament to the power the social media can wield in shaping public opinion.
In the heat of campaigns for the last general elections, former President Goodluck Jonathan’s Twitter page, which was activated in March 2011, had about 30 tweets and 25,000 followers.
But his main challenger at the time, President Muhammadu Buhari of the APC, who had only joined Twitter about three months earlier, had tweeted about 900 times and had gained over 117,000 followers.
His continuous interactions with the public, particularly the youths on the social media, can be said to have helped peel off Buhari’s dictatorial image and won him the election.
Suddenly, the battlefield for elections was shifted to a new ground, the social media, as a new political era was heralded in the country. But Nigerians have also found the social media as a formidable tool to press for agitations.
When in 2010, the state of health of the then President, the late Umaru Yar’Adua , was shrouded in secrecy, social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook were used to launch ‘Enough is Enough’, a campaign that called for the instatement of the then Vice-President Jonathan as the Acting President.
In January 2012, Nigerians also showed a capacity to use the social media as a tool for public agitation when they resisted the Federal Government’s plan to remove fuel subsidy with #OccupyNigeria, which grew into a national campaign.
Therefore, when the ‘Bill for an Act to Prohibit Frivolous Petitions and Other Matters Connected Therewith, 2015’ was sponsored by Senator Bala Ibn Na’Allah, the Deputy Senate Leader, representing Kebbi South Senatorial District, it was only natural for the social media and the users to fight back.
The bill prescribes “up to two years in prison or $10,000 (N2m) fine or both for anyone disseminating via text message, Twitter,WhatsApp, or any other form of social media an ‘abusive statement.’”
This also involves messages intending to “set the public against any person and group of persons, an institution of government or such other bodies established by law.”
If passed into law, the bill will restrict at least 15 million monthly active users of Facebook in Nigeria, “all of them using mobile devices to like, share and upload content on the social network.”
Nigeria’s telecommunications industry is growing at an outstanding rate and so is the number of phone users who use texts, instant or twitter direct messaging services to communicate with one another.
Nigerian Communications Commission’s midyear subscribers’ report put the number of active phone users in the country at 145.4 million and that mobile Internet users have grown by 13.6 per cent during the first half of 2015 to reach an all time high of 92.6 million.
A lot of social media enthusiasts and analysts are afraid that the bill would restrict freedom of speech in the country and are also disappointed by the way politicians seem to have turned against the social media that they benefitted from during election campaigns.
For instance, President Buhari, Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo, Governor Nasir El-Rufai, Senator Bukola Saraki, Senator Dino Melaye, and Senator Ben Murray Bruce are some of the politicians who have embraced the social media as a tool to reach out to members of the public.
For example, the President, Committee for the Defence of Human Rights, Mr. Malachy Ugwumadu, said it was convenient for politicians to use the social media when it served their purpose and then fight it when at its receiving end.
He said, “Even the members of the senate who are now eager to clamp down on the social media benefitted from the social media during their campaigns.
“Then, it was convenient and proper for them to use the social media. Now, all the mudslinging is over and they are saying that nobody should throw jabs at them any longer. We at CDHR are saying that any person who believes that his character is being defamed by any blogger or user of the social media should be able to identify the person and take them to court.”
He recalled having Senator Shehu Sani, a sitting lawmaker, as a team member of the Joint Action Committee of Nigeria, when it demanded that “on no condition shall the fundamental rights of Nigerians including their freedom of expression be compromised.”
“This bill intends to compromise that law and we will not sit back and watch the unscrupulous indiscretion of the legislators to compromise that law,” he said.
Describing one of the cardinal principles of liberal democracy as “the incorporation of the freedom to freely express oneself”, Ugwumadu said there are existing laws that seek to take care of libel, slander, defamation of character and cyber crimes.
An online journalist and social media enthusiast, Mr. Benjamin Ezeamalu, described the bill as “an attempt to gag citizens, restrict free speech and basically curtail freedom of speech.”
Ezeamalu also noted that the Cyber Crime Law was already taking care of the excesses of online media users including bloggers, noting that the motive of the proponents of the bill was to deprive citizens of their rights to free speech.
He said, “I think it is what should be condemned by well-meaning Nigerians. It should never have been brought up, let alone get to the point of passing the second reading at the senate. It is something that should not have seen the light of the day from the outset.
“I know that an agenda of an association of online publishers, of which my organisation is a member, is to see how it can coordinate all online media houses to ensure more responsibility.
“Then, we have the Cyber Crime Law and I know two journalists in court now for allegedly violating it. It is one thing to come after a media house or blogger that publishes lies but when you try to create laws to criminalise citizens’ rights to free speech, there is a problem.
“We always like to model our democracy after the US and others but they don’t have such laws. In their music, they call their presidents all sorts of names and nothing happens.”
Interestingly, one of the alleged proponents of the controversial bill is Melaye, who has recently been an object of attack on the social media, following his position.
The Senate via its tweeter handle, @NGRSenate, on December 3, 2015, said: “Senator @dino_melaye says the tabloid;Sahara Reporters is a threat to democracy with their continued act of insubordination.”
But on November 24, 2013, when Melaye was openly critical of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party, he had via @dino_melaye, tweeted: “We stand with Sahara Reporters. Don’t be moved by local threat. @SaharaReporters we are proud of you jare.”
On a visit to the office of Sahara Reporters,Melaye also tweeted: “Inside the well equipped, staffed and organised office of Sahara reporters. Serious guys, I must confess.”
However, there have also been arguments in favour of the passage of the bill.
One of the recent examples of how the social media is abused occurred when Governor El-Rufai tweeted that the administration of former President Jonathan spent N64bn to celebrate Independence Day anniversaries between 2011 and 2014.
The tweet trended and many members of the public took the information as true, considering that it came from a sitting governor.
But information that was later obtained from the Office of the Secretary General of the Federation and made available to BudgIT Nigeria, an organisation committed to exposing transparency and accountability in public finance, showed that the Jonathan administration only spent N333.6m for four years to hold Independence Day celebrations.
In his view, a lawyer, Mr. Liborous Oshoma, said such instances still did not give the government the right to clamp down on the use of the social media, adding that the “law of libel and slander is very much in place.”
He said, “The problem is that they are moving for a blanket law. It means that tomorrow, if I put true information out which is against the government, it can clamp down on me and claim that it is false.
“For example, a policeman harasses you but you don’t have a video evidence to prove it. You mention it on the social media. Then the policeman claims it is a lie. And because he works for the police, they arrest you and claim that you have lied against the force.
“So we need to be very careful not to take away the people’s freedom completely while trying to limit their freedom.
“If a man is accused of spreading false information against a governor and for him to prove that information is justified, he still needs the government. So who will give him the evidence that it is justified when it is against the government?
“Who determines the truthfulness or the falsity of the statement that was made? If El-Rufai said Jonathan spent an amount for Independence Day celebrations, it is left for Jonathan to say that is not the position and because of that, sue El-Rufai for libel. He is at liberty to do so.”
And for users of the social media with no verifiable addresses where they can be contacted, Oshoma suggested that Nigeria should improve on its monitoring of such users.
He said, “What we should be doing is that in registering domain names, we should expand our Internet access. In advanced countries, once you are blogging, the department that controls such activities knows your location and where your information is coming from.
“Our laws should also expand the admissibility of social media-generated evidence by virtue of our Evidence Act because in the Act, WhatsApp messages and other social media contents are not admissible.”
A social media enthusiast, Mr. Gbenga Olurunpomi, said the bill would “impact on how people get access to information as a fundamental right by section 39 of the 1999 constitution.”
He said, “Secondly, how can one even define an abuse? If you feel that somebody has abused you, why criminalise it? Why not go to court? There is already a section of the constitution that criminalises defamation, so why do we need a new law? SMS and MMS are vital ways of exchanging information so why should people be constrained by any law?”
Meanwhile, the Nigerian Guild of Editors has demanded, unconditionally, that the Senate suspends all proceedings with respect to the bill.
The Guild made its position on the bill, which has been tagged the Social Media Bill, known in a statement by its President, Garba Deen Muhammad.
It alleged that the objective of the bill was to outlaw the freedom of expression of all Nigerian citizens and freedom of speech of all media organisations operating in print, electronic and online platforms in Nigeria and beyond.
It further condemned the bill for targeting “personal and private means of communication such as SMS or text messages and WhatsApp, among others.”
However, President Buhari had promised not to assent to any legislation that might be inconsistent with the constitution, saying that his administration was committed to protect free speech in keeping with democratic tradition.
This followed public hostility towards the Social Media Bill being debated by the Senate.
No comments:
Post a Comment