A Nigerian legal practitioner, A. Nwachukwu Nwosuegbe, Esq., has warned that most Nigerians remain unaware of key provisions in the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act 2024, despite its sweeping impact on digital rights, online expression, and business activities.
Nwosuegbe, who studied law at Abia State University, Uturu, and was called to the Nigerian Bar in 2025 after completing the Nigerian Law School in Port Harcourt, told FunmiNews Nigeria that the gap between legislation and public awareness remains troubling. He pointed to Section 7 of the Act, which compels cybercafé operators to register with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) and the Computer Professionals’ Registration Council of Nigeria (CPN), while also maintaining a user sign-in register for law enforcement. “The average cybercafé operator in Nigeria is not aware of this provision,” he noted, describing it as evidence of poor public enlightenment.
He faulted federal agencies responsible for information dissemination — including the Federal Ministry of Information, the National Orientation Agency (NOA), and the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) — for failing to educate citizens on the law. “Public legal education on the intricacies of this law is minimal, and the overall public knowledge is unfortunately deficient,” he said.
Speaking on the Act’s effect on freedom of speech, Nwosuegbe argued that Section 24(1)(a-b), which criminalises messages considered grossly offensive, obscene, or menacing, could be misused to curtail constitutionally protected expression. While Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution permits reasonable restrictions on free speech for national security and public order, Nwosuegbe warned that some sections of the Cybercrime Act “might fail to meet the crucial standard of being reasonable, precise, and proportionate.” He acknowledged, however, that regulating cyberspace remains necessary to tackle cyberbullying and harassment.
The lawyer further highlighted how the law touches social media influencers. Under Section 22(3), identity theft and impersonation with malicious intent are criminalised, offering legitimate influencers protection from fraudsters. However, Nwosuegbe indicated that some influencers have faced arrests over online posts deemed offensive under Section 24(1). He described cyberstalking as a growing threat with real emotional and psychological consequences for victims.
Raising deeper concerns, Nwosuegbe said the law could be exploited by politicians and powerful individuals to suppress dissent. He warned that history shows how legal instruments are often used for political advantage, and explained that politicians could pursue cyberstalking cases or defamation under Nigeria’s Criminal Code. “Nevertheless, judicial interpretation and constitutional safeguards remain critical in ensuring the Act is not weaponised by politicians against legitimate dissent,” he said.
Offering advice to Nigerians, Nwosuegbe urged the public to study the law closely and understand their rights. “Ignorance of the law is not an excuse,” he said. He stressed that citizens have the right to criticise government policies and officials provided their statements remain factual and free of hate speech, harassment, or threats. He also reminded Nigerians of their right to remain silent and seek legal representation if approached by law enforcement over online activities. Finally, he encouraged support for civil society organisations advocating for digital rights, noting that their role in checking abuses and pushing for reform is indispensable.
