News
FG Moves to Amend Cybercrimes Act

The Federal Government has stated that the Federal Ministry of Justice is committed to pursuing the amendment of the Cybercrimes Act, which many lawyers, journalists and activists have considered repressive, unconstitutional and illegal.
This was stated yesterday by Mr. Terlumun George Tyendezwa, Head, Cybercrimes Prosecution Unit, Federal Ministry of Justice, at a Media Interactive Session on the ‘Constitutionality and Legality of the Cybercrimes Act in Nigeria’, organized by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) in collaboration with the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), USA.
At the Media Interactive Session held in Ikeja, Lagos, Mr. Tyendezwa said: “The Cybercrimes Act is not perfect. One of the reasons why I am here is that I have an open door, we want to engage on the Act. We are interested in engaging with all stakeholders in the Justice sector. Whatever is not useful, we can seek amendment on this.
“From the point of passage, we as the operators knew that there were things that need to change. We are presently collating memoranda on amendment of the Act. But amendment takes time and cost money.”
He also said: “We know the importance of law as a social driver. The office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice continues to place high value on entrenched fundamental human rights and engaging with all stakeholders on the Cybercrimes Act is one of our approaches.”
Earlier at the meeting, a group of lawyers, journalists, activists and other stakeholders unanimously declared the Nigeria’s Cybercrimes Act as “repressive, oppressive and unconstitutional. The Act should immediately be repealed or dropped, as many of its provisions blatantly offend the rights to freedom of expression, association and media freedom.”
The group also called on the next Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice to “prioritize challenging in court the constitutionality and legality of the Cybercrime Act, which is antithetical to respect for freedom of expression including online and the government’s commitment to fight grand corruption.”
Earlier, Mr Tayo Oyetibo, SAN in his paper titled The Constitutionality and Legality of the Cybercrimes Act in Nigeria stated: “the supremacy of the constitution over every other law is an immutable principle of Nigerian constitutional law derived from the provisions of section 1(3) of the constitution itself.
In creating criminal offences, section 24(1) of the Cybercrimes Act uses words that are entirely subjective in meaning to describe the actus reuselements of the offences, despite the fact that the actus reus of an offence ought to be capable of objective and not subjective definition.”
According to him, “Worse still, the Cybercrimes Act makes no effort to give certainty to the meanings of any of the words used in its section 24(1) by defining them anywhere in the Act, which means that only judicial definitions can be given to those words in any case where a person is charged with an offence under section 24(1) of the Act.”
The paper read in part: “In the context of the constitutionally guaranteed right of citizens to freedom of speech under the Nigerian constitution, there is the pressing question of whether the Cybercrimes Act is fit for the purpose pursuant to which it was enacted, particularly in view of the provisions of its section 24(1)?”
“It would appear that the answer to this poser is in the negative, which means that it is imperative for deliberate steps to be taken to remedy the situation, particularly against the backdrop of widespread complaints against the deliberate misuse and abuse of the Cybercrimes Act against certain categories of persons in Nigeria.”
“In this regard, this is not a matter in which long winding technical recommendations are necessary. The simple recommendation is that section 24(1) be entirely deleted from the Cybercrimes Act, due to its apparent irreconcilability with the provisions of section 36(12) and 39(1) of the constitution.”
“From a practical standpoint, it means that a person charged with an offence under section 24(1) of the Cybercrimes Act will involuntarily be playing the lottery of judicial interpretation of the words and phrases used in that section.
“This is because virtually all of the words used in section 24(1) of the Act are of such personal character that, any attempt to define them is entirely subject to the whims and caprices of two different sets of people- complainants and judges.”
“It is impossible for a person to be convicted of an offence under section 24(1) of the Cybercrimes Act without conjecture or inference by the court as to the meanings of the words used in that section.
“Worse still, such conjecture or inference can only be imputed by the court at the point of delivering judgment in the matter, at which point the accused person will not have had the opportunity to be heard by the court as to the court’s interpretation of the meanings of those words and phrases.”
“Apart from the above, every person is constitutionally guaranteed the right to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference under section 39(1) of the constitution.
A scenario in which a person is bound by section 24(1) of the Cybercrimes Act to second-guess the exercise of his right to freedom of expression under section 39(1) of the constitution is certainly not one contemplated by the constitution in any way.”
“Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are part of democratic rights of every citizen; our legislature must guard these rights jealously as they are part of the foundation upon which the government itself rests.”
“It is clear that section 24(1) of the Cybercrimes Act portends great danger for every person in Nigeria. This is by reason of the fact that at the time of issuing any communication in exercise of the right to freedom of expression, it is impossible for a person to determine whether or not an offence is being committed under the Cybercrimes Act.
Surely, this is the exact scenario that the framers of the constitution sought to legislate against by the inclusion of the express provisions that are sections 36(12) and 39(1) of the constitution.”
“24(1) is a tool that readily lends itself to abuse and misuse by those in authority against freedom of expression in Nigeria. This is particularly because the Cybercrimes Act contains no safeguards whatsoever to the enforcement of section 24, which carries with it severe criminal sanctions.”
“The Cybercrimes Act is already in desperate need of a significant overhaul to ensure that it does not unwittingly and unconstitutionally place citizens at the unfortunate risk of the luck of a criminal draw.”
News
National Assembly to Review National Data Protection Act

Sen. Afolabi Salisu, the Chairman, Senate Committee on ICT and Cyber Security, has said efforts were ongoing to review the National Data Protection Act (2023) to meet emerging threats associated with technological advancement.

Salisu disclosed this on Tuesday at the opening of a three-day workshop, on Data Protection Awareness Promotion organised for the Joint National Assembly Committee on ICT by Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) and Ampersand Development Partners.
He said that since the enactment of the Act in 2023, there have been new developments such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the United Nations Convention on Cyber Crimes.
The lawmaker said that there is a nexus between data governance and cyber crimes hence the need to look at the Act and strengthen the handshakes where necessary.
According to him, we need to ensure the security of our country, particularly in the cyber space and our data governance as well as technology advancement like AI.
“As legislators, we need to have knowledge on data privacy and protection for us to be able to effectively legislate in that area.
“You cannot legislate in an area that you are not sufficiently knowledgeable in; this workshop affords us the opportunity to build our capacity to understand modern principles of data protection and to be in position to review the National Data Protection Act
“It has been three years down the line, how has this law addressed the need of the nation, particularly given the emerging technologies and how it compares with other other countries.
“At the end of this exercise, we would be able to come up with a roadmap, a timeline, with a view to review the National Data Protection Act,” he said.
The lawmaker tasked all Nigerians on private data protection saying that it is the duty of all citizens to ensure safety of their data.
He said that many free public WiFi and Apps are not always free as users pay with their data and adverts without knowing it.
Also speaking, the Chairman, House Committee on ICT and Cyber Security, Rep. Stanley Olajide (APC- Oyo) said that data is gold and Nigeria’s next prosperity was not going to be oil but data.
He said that no investor would bring foreign funds or capital into Nigeria, without making sure that the right data protection law is in place, which Nigeria has.
“Whatever data that we have is our sovereign wealth, is something that belongs to us. How do we protect it? We have to make sure that the right legal frameworks are put in place, so that those data, once bridged, you can actually hold entities, corporation, the countries responsible when they’ breach your data law.
“In the U.S., they have their data law; if you put anything in their cloud, is owned by the United States. So we also have to have something here.
“Anything that resides here in Nigeria and is generated here must be home and protected by our country; so we are put in the right laws and framework in place just to do that,” he said.
News
Trapped Between Nigeria’s Failure and South Africa’s Xenophobic Violence

By Blaise Udunze
When the word “xenophobic” is talked about, most affected African countries tend to focus on the pains being experienced by their citizens in South Africa. For a moment, it calls for Nigeria and the rest of the African continent to pause and ask, how did we get here?

Xenophobic Violence
The recent happenings across the streets of Johannesburg, Pretoria, and Durban, a painful pattern continues to unfold with frightening and fearful regularity, as Nigerian-owned businesses are looted, migrants hunted, families displaced, and African nationals reduced to targets of rage. If asked, the majority would chorus that the recurring images of xenophobic violence in South Africa are disturbing enough, and no doubt, yes, but the deeper tragedy is beyond the flames and bloodshed. It lies in the silent failures back home that forced many Nigerians into vulnerable exile in the first place.
The reality, as a matter of fact, is that to understand the suffering of Nigerians in South Africa, one must first confront the uncomfortable truth that xenophobia is not merely a South African problem. It is also a Nigerian governance problem exported abroad.
Nigeria, often celebrated as the “Giant of Africa,” has now become the “Mama Africa” who has failed to nurture her many children, with the fact that behind every Nigerian fleeing hardship for survival, known as the “japa” syndrome, in another African country is a story shaped by economic frustration, failed institutions, poor leadership, unemployment, and a financial system disconnected from the realities of ordinary citizens.
One apt way to confirm these inimical factors, the South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa, recently acknowledged this uncomfortable reality when he urged African leaders to address the domestic failures driving mass migration across the continent. Speaking amid renewed anti-foreigner tensions, Ramaphosa identified “misgovernance” as one of the factors forcing Africans to seek refuge in countries like South Africa. Of a truth, his comments may have generated debate, and some “patriotic Nigerians” may also want to prove him wrong, but they reflected a painful reality many African governments would rather avoid.
Nigeria, despite its vast human and natural resources, has increasingly become a country where millions no longer see a future at home. This is a critical irony and the height of it all because a nation blessed with oil wealth and entrepreneurial energy and one of the youngest populations in the world is yet burdened by systemic corruption, policy inconsistency, infrastructural collapse, and a leadership class that has often prioritised politics over productivity, especially with the imminence of an election.
It is so detestable and at the same time fearful that the result is a generation of young Nigerians trapped between hopelessness and migration.
One regrettable experience that has continued to haunt the country for decades, is that successive governments have squandered opportunities that could have transformed Nigeria into an industrial and economic powerhouse. Public resources that should have been invested in power, roads, healthcare, manufacturing, education and enterprise development have either disappeared into private pockets or become trapped in wasteful bureaucratic structures.
Reports indicating that over $214 billion in public funds may have been lost, diverted, or trapped in opaque fiscal systems over the last decade capture the scale of Nigeria’s accountability crisis. Whether exact or conservative, such figures reveal a country losing resources or funds rapidly from severe bleeding that could have changed millions of lives.
Looking intently at these developments, one would know that the tragedy is not merely corruption itself but the opportunities corruption destroyed.
Come to think of this fact that with proper governance and strategic economic planning, Nigeria could have developed a thriving SME ecosystem capable of employing millions of citizens. Instead, unemployment and underemployment have become defining realities of national life. The World Economic Forum recently identified unemployment and lack of economic opportunity as Nigeria’s greatest economic threat, yet the country continues to struggle with coherent employment data and long-term economic direction.
This economic suffocation explains why migration has become less of a choice and more of a survival strategy for many Nigerians.
At the centre of this crisis is another troubling contradiction, which is that Nigeria’s banking sector appears increasingly profitable while the real economy continues to deteriorate.
Ordinarily, banks in developing economies are expected to function as engines of growth by financing productive sectors, supporting innovation, and empowering small businesses. Across the world, SMEs are recognised as the backbone of grassroots economic development, and the tangible result is that they create jobs, stimulate local production, and expand economic participation.
In Nigeria, SMEs account for over 70 per cent of registered businesses, contribute nearly half of the country’s GDP and generate between 84 to 90 per cent of employment. Yet, despite their enormous economic importance, SMEs receive barely between 0.5 per cent and one per cent of total commercial bank lending.
This is not just a policy failure; it is an economic tragedy. Rather than financing entrepreneurs and productive enterprises, Nigerian banks have increasingly found comfort in investing heavily in government treasury securities. In 2025 alone, major Nigerian banks reportedly generated N6.68 trillion from total investment securities and treasury bills, benefiting from high-yield government debt instruments instead of supporting businesses capable of creating jobs.
The banking sector’s recapitalisation exercise, which successfully raised N4.56 trillion, was celebrated as a regulatory achievement. But the critical question remains. The recapitalisation is for what purpose?
If stronger banks continue to avoid the productive economy while SMEs remain starved of affordable credit, recapitalisation merely strengthens financial institutions without strengthening national development.
Today, private sector credit in Nigeria remains significantly low compared to many African economies. High interest rates, excessive collateral demands, weak credit infrastructure and risk-averse banking practices have created an environment where small businesses struggle to survive, and these implications are devastating.
Every denied SME loan is a denied employment opportunity. Every failed business is another frustrated entrepreneur. Every frustrated entrepreneur is another Nigerian considering migration.
This is how economic dysfunction transforms into human displacement. In a situation like this, it is noteworthy to state that South Africa naturally becomes an attractive destination because of its relatively advanced infrastructure and larger economy. Today, this has informed Nigerians and other African countries alike to migrate there, not because they hate their country but because they are searching for dignity through work and enterprise.
Yet, in a cruel twist, many become targets of xenophobic violence. Foreign nationals are accused of “taking jobs,” dominating businesses, and contributing to crime. Shops are attacked. Businesses are burned. Lives are lost.
It is not a surprise anymore that the disturbing rhetoric surrounding xenophobia has become increasingly normalised and perceived as fighting against saboteurs. Another major concern is that social media posts celebrating violence against Nigerians reveal a frightening and fearful dehumanisation of fellow Africans. This has continued to be heralded unaddressed, as some extremist anti-migrant groups now openly mobilise hostility against foreign nationals under the guise of economic nationalism.
Yet, as opposition leader Julius Malema rightly asked during one of the recent xenophobic debates. “After attacking foreigners and shutting down their businesses, how many jobs have actually been created?” If you are smart enough to know, it is glaring that this is a question that cuts through the emotional manipulation surrounding xenophobia, which also reflects the fact that destroying a Nigerian-owned shop does not solve unemployment, nor does killing migrants create prosperity. Violence against fellow Africans does not fix structural inequality.
Malema’s argument was blunt but accurate in revealing that xenophobia is not an economic strategy. It must be perceived with the right perspective as the symptom of deeper failures, poverty, inequality, weak governance, and political frustration.
Historically, just like other colonised African countries, South Africa itself carries deep old wounds. The legacy of apartheid left enduring economic inequalities, spatial segregation, unemployment, and psychological scars, but this should not continue to shape social tensions today. What is of concern is that the same people, like other African countries, experienced, were expected to remain forward-looking and forge ahead rather than dwell in the past.
It is even more pathetic that decades after the fall of apartheid, millions of Black South Africans remain trapped in poverty and exclusion; perhaps they are not to be blamed for their failures as they claimed, but the foreigners who didn’t stop them from exerting their skills become the scapegoats.
That frustration often seeks an outlet, and immigrants become easy scapegoats. This, however, does not excuse the brutality.
The stories emerging from xenophobic attacks are horrifying and very dastardly and humiliating, as African migrants have reportedly been beaten, burned alive, stoned, and hunted in communities where they once sought refuge, as two Nigerian citizens were said to have been beaten and burnt to death. To say the least, the pain becomes even more ironic when viewed against history.
Because Nigeria played a major role in supporting South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggle, ranging from financial assistance to diplomatic pressure, scholarships, activism, and cultural solidarity, Nigerians stood firmly with Black South Africans during some of apartheid’s darkest years, which was enough to prevent such ugly events. Nigeria did so much to the point that Nigerian students contributed financially to anti-apartheid campaigns. Nigerian musicians used music to mobilise continental resistance. Successive governments invested enormous diplomatic and material resources into the liberation struggle.
The children and grandchildren of those who made such sacrifices are now among those facing hostility in South Africa today.
History makes the tragedy even heavier. Yet, Nigeria must also confront its own failures honestly. The truth is, if Nigeria had invested half the energy it spent supporting external liberation struggles into building a functional domestic economy, perhaps millions of Nigerians would not be fleeing abroad in search of economic survival today.
The painful reality is that many Nigerians abroad are not economic adventurers; they are economic exiles.
The ugliest side of it all is that they are exiled by unemployment, exiled by corruption, and exiled by policy failures. Again, they are exiled by a system that has repeatedly failed to convert national wealth into shared prosperity but into embezzlement that still finds its resting place in a foreign account.
This is why solving xenophobia requires more than diplomatic protests or emotional outrage as exuded in the National Assembly by some members like Adams Oshiomhole and others. This calls for the political actors and those in the financial space to fix the conditions that force Nigerians into vulnerable migration in the first place.
One undeniable fact is that, as a country, Nigeria must fundamentally rethink governance and economic management as it takes into consideration the following solutions.
First, public accountability must become non-negotiable and should not be compromised anywhere. Corruption and resource mismanagement are critical and have robbed generations of opportunities, and these are the major traits fueling the exile. Infrastructure, industrial development, education, and healthcare must become genuine priorities rather than campaign slogans, as all these must become a reality, not a feeble promise.
Second, the banking sector must reconnect with the real economy. Financial institutions cannot continue generating enormous profits from government securities while productive sectors collapse. The government should hold a roundtable discussion with banks, which must be incentivized and, where necessary, compelled to increase lending to SMEs and productive industries capable of generating employment.
Third, there must be deliberate and conscious investment in skills, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Young Nigerians should not have to leave their homeland merely to survive because it is an aberration for a country that is enormously rich but still has some of its best hands eloping from the country.
Finally, African governments must reject the politics of division and scapegoating. This contradiction is at its height because Africa cannot claim to pursue continental unity while Africans are hunted in other African countries.
In all of the deliberation, the truth remains the same, in the sense that the story of Nigerians suffering xenophobic violence in South Africa is ultimately a story about failed systems on both sides, one on the side of economic failures pushing migrants out and the social failures turning migrants into enemies.
Until these structural realities are confronted with honesty and urgency, the cycle will continue. More young Nigerians will leave. More migrants will become vulnerable. More African societies will turn inward against each other.
But this trajectory is not irreversible. One gift that can’t be taken away from Nigerians is that Nigeria still possesses the talent, entrepreneurial energy, and human capital necessary to build a prosperous economy that gives its citizens reasons to stay rather than flee. The truth is that what has been lacking is not potential but responsible leadership and economic vision.
The true solution to xenophobia may therefore begin far away from the streets of Johannesburg or Durban. It may begin in Abuja, with governance that works, institutions that serve, banks that invest in people, and leadership that finally understands that national dignity is measured not by speeches but by whether citizens can build meaningful lives at home.
Until then, the “japa” flag will keep flying, as many Nigerians will remain exiled, not merely by borders, but by the failures of the country they still desperately want to believe in.
Blaise, a journalist and PR professional, writes from Lagos and can be reached via: [email protected]
News
Dr. Olusola Teniola, Honoured with Yoruba Study Group Golden Leadership Excellence Award

ipNX Director, Dr. Olusola Teniola, has been awarded the prestigious Golden Leadership Excellence Award by the Yoruba Study Group. Dr Teniola, who leads Strategic Business Initiatives (SBI) at ipNX, the leading Nigerian technology and telecommunications company, was conferred with this award at the ipNX Corporate Headquarters, Victoria Island, Lagos.

Dr. Teniola was recognised as an Icon of Excellence & Most Outstanding Administrator of the Year 2025/2026 for his remarkable contributions to the advancement of Nigeria’s telecommunications industry, as well as his unwavering commitment to making data more affordable and accessible to millions of Nigerians.
The award celebrates his embodiment of the revered Omoluabi ethos of Yorubaland, defined by integrity, diligence, excellence, and strong character. His leadership and impact have been particularly notable through his work with the Association of Telecommunications Companies of Nigeria (ATCON) and the Alliance for Affordable Internet, where he has played a pivotal role in shaping policies and initiatives that drive digital inclusion and connectivity across Nigeria.
In its citation, the Yoruba Study Group commended Dr. Teniola for his “exemplary contributions to the advancement and management of telecommunications in Nigeria, his unquantifiable efforts in ensuring affordable data for the teeming masses, and his outstanding record of quality service delivery.”
Reacting to the recognition, Dr. Teniola said “I am deeply honoured to receive this award from the Yoruba Study Group. This recognition is not just a personal milestone, but a reflection of the collective efforts of industry stakeholders committed to advancing Nigeria’s digital future. I remain dedicated to driving initiatives that promote affordable access to connectivity, foster innovation, and empower more Nigerians to participate meaningfully in the digital economy, while upholding the values of integrity, excellence, and service.”
The Yoruba Study Group, a socio-political organisation founded in 2019, is dedicated to promoting Yoruba traditions, values, and cultural heritage. ipNX described the award as a testament to Dr. Teniola’s enduring impact on both the technology sector and society at large.
“Dr. Teniola exemplifies the highest standards of leadership, innovation, and service. His contributions continue to strengthen Nigeria’s digital economy while reflecting the values of excellence and integrity that we uphold at ipNX,” said Mobolaji Caxton-Martins, Head Marketing and Corporate Communications, ipNX Nigeria.
This recognition not only highlights Dr. Teniola’s professional achievements but also underscores his commitment to fostering inclusive growth, strengthening industry collaboration, and advancing Nigeria’s position in the global digital landscape.
E-Financial3 days agoTranscorp Excites Shareholders with ₦20.3 Billion Dividend @20th AGM
Telecom2 days agoMTN, Airtel, Glo Under Pressure as FG Demands Better Service Delivery
E-Financial3 days agoAfrica Prudential Launches Sabivest to Boost Digital Investment Access
Telecom3 days agoPAFON 3.0: Agency Banking Key to Reaching Millions of Unbanked Nigerians – AMMBAN
E-Financial2 days agoMastercard, BMONI Launch Multi-Currency Payment Cards in Nigeria
E-Business2 days agoFirm Warns of Phishing Attacks via Compromised Amazon Simple Email Service Accounts
General News3 days agoPIN Records 3.07Bn Media Reach, Expands Digital Rights Impact Across Africa in 2025
General News3 days agoInterswitch Inducts 3rd Interns into Its Developer Academy













