EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT NITDA'S PROPOSED SOCIAL MEDIA REGULATION IN NIGERIA
The Nigerian government has set out to regulate social media platforms with a new Code of Practice (DRAFT CODE OF PRACTICE FOR INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE PLATFORMS/INTERNET INTERMEDIARIES). Plans for the Code of Practice were announced in January by Director-General of NITDA, Mr Kashifu Inuwa.
The National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA) announced that it had developed a draft Code of Practice for Interactive Computer Service Platforms/Internet Intermediaries and defined by the code as
“electronic medium or site where services are provided by means of a computer resource and on-demand and where users create, upload, share, disseminate, modify, or access information, including websites that provide reviews, gaming Platform, online sites for conducting commercial transactions.”
Examples include Twitter, Tik Tok, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.
In the statement signed by NITDA Head of
Corporate Affairs and External Relationships, Hadiza Umar, the Code is
supposedly aimed at “protecting the fundamental human rights of Nigerians and
non-Nigerians living in the country, as well as defining guidelines for
interacting on the digital ecosystem”.
THE CODE MANDATE
NITDA instructs that all Interactive
Computer Service Platforms with more than 100,000 users would be required to
fulfil certain conditions in order to operate in the country. While this
includes US-based social media platforms, it also includes indigenous sites
like Nairaland, blogs like Linda Ikeji, and newsletter platforms like Substack
with over 100,000 users.
These platforms would have to do the
following:
§ Register as legal entities with the country’s Corporate Affairs
Commission (CAC)
§ Pay taxes
§ Appoint country representatives
Provide information to the Nigerian government on harmful accounts,
troll groups, and deleting all information that violates Nigerian law
The draft Code is divided into 5 parts, with
the first 2 parts laying down the responsibilities of the Interactive Computer
Service Platforms, while Part IV—titled “Prohibitions”—lays down orders for the
removal of material prohibited by Nigerian law. According to the draft,
“Prohibited Material” includes anything that threatens the public interest, order,
security, peace, and morality—content that must be taken down within 24 hours.
In Part I of the draft Code, NITDA lays
down 11 primary responsibilities which include abiding by Nigerian laws,
providing dedicated channels for government agencies to lodge complaints,
removing any content reported by government agencies within 24 hours,
disclosing identities of reported creators to the Nigerian government, and
expeditiously removing non-consensual sexual content.
However, it is public knowledge that numbers 3,4,5,6,7, and 8 are already in place by most social media platforms as they tend to uphold
community guidelines with appropriate sanctions in place for violators.
Part II of the draft Code consigns 12
additional responsibilities including the requirement for Interactive Computer
Service Platforms to file annual compliance reports that detail the numbers of
[active] registered Nigerian users, deactivated accounts, and removed content,
among other things. This part lists the responsibilities of the platforms to
inform the users of their obligations which include abiding by all Nigerian
laws.
THE BACKLASH of NIGERIA’S POOR REGULATORY
HISTORY
There are few provisions within the draft
Code that fulfills NITDA’s aim of “protecting the fundamental human rights of
Nigerians”. For example, Items 4 and 5 of Part I seek to protect Nigerians from
promoting revenge porn and child sexual abuse materials (CSAM), while Item 1 of
Part II promotes equal distribution of information for Nigerian users.
In the opinion of Rachel Dandfodio, a legal consultant and entrepreneur,
“The admissible part of the bill is that it tries to hold these social media
platforms accountable for all the information and mechanisms promoted on their
platform. There are, however, undeniable glaring red flags in the draft and
they outweigh the good by a landslide.”
As Dandfodio explains it, the biggest red
flag in the draft Code is how much information it wants to control. “There are
about 5 classes of information highlighted: misinformation, disinformation,
harmful content, unlawful content, and prohibited materials. While unlawful
content already has legal backing, misinformation and harmful content are left
to discretion. It’s easy to point out where child sexual abuse materials are
criminalized in Nigerian law but the same can’t be said for what the draft
defines as prohibited or harmful material.”
Part IV of the code, which examines
Prohibited Material, prescribes that all content that is contrary to morality,
or public interest should be deleted once a complaint is made. This brings to
light the possibility of the Nigerian government going after citizens who post
materials in support of LGBTQ persons, or anyone posting content deemed
religiously “blasphemous”, a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment in
many Nigerian states.
Part IV of NITDA’s Code of Practice
Part IV of NITDA’s draft Code of Practice
There are so many grey areas surrounding
the draft, and as morality is relative all over the country, what measures will
the agencies use to determine what is perceived as “immoral”? Absolute power
corrupts absolutely. To translate the Latin maxim, who will guard the guards?
With the upheaval of corruption and power tussles in the country, what if this
power becomes hijacked?
While these provisions wouldn’t constitute
a problem in other regions, Nigeria’s history is riddled with fundamental human
rights infringement and the misappropriation of laws. In the events following
its #EndSARS protests where Nigerian youths fighting against police brutality
were thrust into the global spotlight, many faced imprisonment and financial
sanctions due to their involvement on and off social media.
The #EndSARS event of 2020, which also
sparked commentary from celebrities like Rihanna, Trevor Noah, and ex-US
president Barack Obama, spurred numerous attempts by the Nigerian government to
regulate social media. There was the social media bill of 2019, and the hate
speech bill which proscribed death as the penalty for hate speech. In 2021,
there was also an attempt to modify the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC)
Act to cover social media platforms.
NIGERIANS' REACTION TO THE BILL
Since the bill was announced,
many Nigerians have taken to social media, specifically Twitter, to express
their concerns over the bill. Of course, there is a need for fear, given our
nation’s history of human rights suppression.
SpunAmanda, a social media influencer,
says, “This is going to curb our freedom of expression immensely and give power
to potential despots. How will people protest against injustices? How will we
be able to do anything? Social media is like the oh place we have freedom of
anonymity.”
Dare, an artist feels the government is
not addressing the root issues. “No power. No sustainable roads. The education
system is as good as a failure. And the only thing they can address is the
potential millions they will earn in taxes?”
In addition to hoping for the best, it is recommended that some pressure be mounted, for public comments on the proposed draft be officially documented and considered before the final code is produced, as the code is
still in the draft stage. This suggestion is made with the assumption that the NITDA has the statutory powers to come up with this regulation, and that this regulation does not unlawfully derogate from the rights of Nigerians to freedom of expression under the Nigerian Constitution.
Contributors
Principal Partner,
.jpg)