Broadcasting
SERAP Sues Buhari, Ministers over Failure to Unblock Lines of 72m Subscribers
Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a suit against President Muhammadu Buhari and two Ministers “over the failure to unblock the phone lines of over 72 million telecommunication subscribers barred from making calls on their SIMs.”
This followed their refusal to yield to SERAP’s earlier demand on the matter.
The latest move by the public watchdog body in a statement signed Sunday by Kolawole Oluwadare, deputy director.
The suit followed the recent directive by the Federal Government (FG) to telecommunications companies to block outgoing calls on all unlinked lines, as the deadline for the verification expired on March 31.
Following the directive, over 72 million subscribers have now been barred from making calls.
In the suit number FHC/L/CS/711/2022 filed last week at the Federal High Court in Lagos, SERAP said it was seeking: “an order setting aside the directive by President Buhari to telecommunications companies to block outgoing calls on all unlinked lines without due process of law, and for being inconsistent with the requirements of legality, necessity and proportionality.”
SERAP in addition said it was seeking “an order of perpetual injunction restraining President Buhari and the Minister of Communication and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami from unlawfully directing telecommunications companies to block outgoing calls on all unlinked lines, without due process and in violation of Nigerians’ human rights.”
Similarly, the body is seeking “an order directing and compelling President Buhari to ensure adequate infrastructure and logistics to allow Nigerians including persons with disabilities, older persons and persons living in remote areas, to capture their data and conclude registration to obtain National Identity Number (NIN).”
In the suit, the statement indicated SERAP is at variance with order, “directing and compelling the Federal Government to unblock the phone lines unlawfully barred would be entirely consistent with the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], and the country’s international obligations to respect, protect, and promote socio-economic rights.”
SERAP is also arguing that, “Where agencies of government are allowed to operate at large and at their whims and caprices in the guise of performing their statutory duties, the end result will be anarchy, and authoritarianism, leading to the loss of the much cherished and constitutionally guaranteed freedom and liberty.”
It contends: “It is in the interest of justice to grant this application. Access to telecommunications services is a condition sine qua non for the effective exercise of human rights. Therefore, the decision to block people from making calls is discriminatory, and a travesty.”
“The blocking of phone lines of Nigerians without due process of law has disproportionately affected those on the margins of society. This has resulted in the discrimination of marginalized or vulnerable groups.”
Joined in the suit as Respondents are Mr Abubakar Malami, SAN Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, and Mr Isa Pantami.
The suit which the statement stated was filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers Oluwadare and Opeyemi Owolabi, read in part: “While Nigerian authorities have a legal responsibility to protect, ensure and secure the rights to life and property, any such responsibility ought to be discharged in conformity with human rights standards.”
“Fundamental rights are regarded as part of human rights and are protected to enhance human dignity and liberty.”
“Unblocking the phone lines unlawfully barred from making calls would improve respect for the rule of law, and ensure people’s right to freedom of expression, and access to information, as well as their right to associate with others.”
“The blocking of people from making calls constitutes impermissible restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression, information, and association.”
“The rights to freedom of opinion and expression and access to information are protected under section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act.”
“These rights must be protected online as they are protected offline. Any restriction on these rights must be provided by law, be necessary in a democratic society and serve a legitimate aim.”
“The blocking of people from making calls on their SIMs also amounts to an arbitrary or unlawful interference with their right to family life, and socio-economic rights, as it unnecessarily or disproportionately interferes with these fundamental human rights.”
“The decision to block the phone lines also appears to be arbitrary, and lacks any legal framework, independent and judicial oversight. This may allow authorities to act in an unfettered and potentially arbitrary or unlawful manner.”
“Under international human rights law, States including Nigeria ‘shall not engage in or condone any disruption of access to digital technologies for segments of the public or an entire population.’ States must refrain from cutting off access to telecommunications services.”
“Millions of Nigerians including persons with disabilities, elderly citizens, persons living in remote areas have been unable to capture their biometrics, and obtain their NINs due to logistical challenges, administrative and bureaucratic burdens, as well as the persistent collapse of the national grid.”
“The rights to freedom of expression, access to information, and freedom of association, whether offline or online, promote the democratic ideal by allowing citizens to voice their concerns, challenge governmental institutions, and hold the government accountable for its actions.”
Recall that SERAP had about two weeks ago urged President Buhari to order reversal of the plan by the FG to block SIMs not linked with the subscribers NINs.
The body threatened legal action against the FG fails to yield to its demand.
By Chukwuemeka Fred Agbata (CFA)
Today, we celebrate a leader whose unwavering commitment to “Everything Technology, Technology Everywhere” is turning bold ideas into real impact for Ndi Anambra.
As someone privileged to lead the Anambra State ICT Agency, driving e-governance initiatives, and now the Geeks & Founders Alliance for Soludo (GEFAS), a coalition of tech professionals, founders, and enthusiasts advancing technology and championing the re-election of Governor Soludo, I see first-hand how Mr. Governor’s vision keeps challenging us to push boundaries: from digitizing government operations to expanding free Solution WiFi, deploying smart solutions, and driving public-private partnerships that create jobs and make Anambra truly work for the people.
Today, under his visionary leadership, the combination of solid physical infrastructure, livable cities, and a growing digital backbone is fast positioning Anambra as an attractive hub for talent, investment, and innovation- a destination and not a departure lounge
Leadership is not about lofty speeches but clear action, and Governor Soludo has shown us that bold decisions, like removing Right of Way charges to drive connectivity, can transform an entire ecosystem.
As we mark his birthday, we rededicate ourselves to this vision: a smarter, more connected, and prosperous Anambra that works for all.
Happy Birthday, Mr. Governor, Oluatuegwu!
Here’s to more impact, more solutions, and a future that keeps rising.
Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has upheld the statutory right of the Audiovisual Rights Society of Nigeria (AVRS) to licence hotels and other business establishments for the public use of audiovisual works (movies and films) transmitted within their premises via Pay-TV subscriptions.
This is a landmark judgment that reaffirms the rights of Nigerian copyright holders and strengthens the creative ecosystem.
Justice Obiora Egwuatu, who gave the judgment, dismissed the case filed by Reiz Continental Hotel Limited against AVRS, where the hotel sought a declaration that it could not be compelled to pay copyright fees for audiovisual content (movies and films) accessed through subscription-based broadcasting.
In the ruling delivered on Thursday, July 24, the court held that AVRS, by virtue of its status as assignees of copyright in several audiovisual works, and approved collective management organisation (CMO) pursuant to Section 88 of the Copyright Act 2022, had demonstrated the legal basis of its licencing activities, and was entitled to issue copyright licences to users of audiovisual works belonging to it, including the Plaintiff (Reiz Continental Hotel Limited). Abuja Formula 1 Grand Prix ticketsNigerian cuisine recipes
The court rejected the claims of Reiz Continental Hotel that it was merely a recipient of broadcasts from a pay subscription television service, and therefore not liable to any licence from AVRS.
It held that the activities of Reiz Continental Hotel, operating a hospitality business, which is profit-driven, and possessing several television sets, which transmit audiovisual content, were carried out in contravention of sections 11(b), (c) and (f) of the Copyright Act in respect of the rights held by AVRS.
The court also held that the acts of transmission of audiovisual works by Reiz Continental Hotel, since done in the context of business, were in contravention of section 36(1)(a) and (g) of the Copyright Act, unless licensed by AVRS.
According to the court, the provision of section 36(1)(g) of the Copyright Act, 2022, renders a person liable for infringement of copyright for performing or causing to be performed for the purposes of trade or business or the promotion of a trade or business, any work in which copyright subsists.
The court further held that participation in a collective licencing agreement by the Hotel Owners Forum Abuja (HOFA), of which Reiz is a member, was binding on Reiz and stopped it from denying the validity of the agreement with AVRS.
Speaking on the judgment, Mike O. Akpan, legal counsel to AVRS and principal partner, Alpha-Edge Legal, said that the judgment is not only a legal victory for AVRS and its members, but also a significant affirmation of Nigeria’s commitment to upholding copyright law and protecting creative enterprise. Nigerian cuisine recipes
He added that it establishes a strong precedent for copyright enforcement across the hospitality sector and other commercial users of protected content.
Reacting to the landmark judgment, Mr. Mahmood Ali-Balogun, chairman of AVRS, said: “This judgment is a profound moment for members of AVRS. It affirms the legitimacy of our collective licencing structure and ensures that copyright owners in the film and movie sector are rightfully protected under the law.
“AVRS has always approached licencing with openness, fairness, and a readiness to dialogue. Today’s court decision is a win for our members, the film industry, for Nigerian creators, and for the nation. It strengthens the foundation upon which the creative economy can grow and attract investment.”
Nigeria Data Protection Commission (NDPC) has refused to release details of the data and privacy rights violation for which it fined MultiChoice Nigeria, despite receiving a Freedom of Information (FOI) request from FIJ.
FIJ otherwise Foundation for Investigative Journalism, is an independent, not-for-profit organisation that combats injustice, holds power to account and speaks for the voiceless.
In its announcement on July 6, the NDPC said it had fined MultiChoice Nigeria N766,242,500 for breaching the data and privacy rights of subscribers and even those who are not necessarily subscribers.
FIJ emailed the data protection commission an FOI request on July 9.
The commission acknowledged the receipt of the email that same day and added: “It has been forwarded to the relevant department and we would respond soon.”
Fifteen days later, FIJ got no other response from the NDPC.
In Nigeria, FOI requests have a seven-day timeframe, and it starts counting as soon as a public institution receives a request for public information.
FIJ understands that holidays, which include a Sunday and a public holiday, are to be excluded in the computation of the timeframe.
The receiving institution is mandated, within those seven days, to either provide the requested information or explain in detail why it is unable to do so based on the provisions of the FOI Act.
Established under the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023, the NDPC’s tasks include safeguarding data privacy, enforcing regulations and promoting responsible data handling in the country.
When the Commission announced the N766.2 million fine against MultiChoice Nigeria, it said the company had violated the privacy rights of subscribers and allowed the illegal cross-border transfer of personal data of Nigerians.
MultiChoice Nigeria operates through various subsidiaries, such as DStv and GOtv. The NDPC said it launched an investigation into the company in the second quarter of 2024.
“NDPC found, among others, that Multichoice violated the data privacy rights of subscribers and their friends who are not necessarily subscribers,” the statement issued by NDPC read in part.
“The Commission also found that Multichoice carries out illegal cross-border transfer of personal data relating to data subjects in Nigeria. The depth of data processing by Multichoice is patently intrusive, unfair, unnecessary and disproportionate.”
FIJ’s FOI request aimed to understand the extent of the data and privacy breaches committed by MultiChoice Nigeria, the remedial measures directed by the NDPC and the specific channels through which the company collected the personal data of Nigerians.
Two weeks after the request was submitted, the NDPC has refused to respond.
Section 7, sub-section 4, of the Freedom of Information Act (2011) states, “Where the government or public institution fails to give access to information or record applied for under this Act or part thereof within the time limit set out in this Act, the institution shall, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed to have refused to give access.”
According to the Act, where a case of wrongful denial of access is established, the defaulting officer or institution commits an offence and is liable on conviction to pay a N500,000 fine.
At the time of this report, there was no publicly documented case of the NDPC granting an FOI request to share more details after an investigation.
In 2023, FIJ detailed how the Nigerian government often violated the FOI Act. Journalists at top newspapers in the country noted that government agencies had a habit of disregarding FOI requests, despite being legally obligated to respond.
FG Asks Banks to Report Individuals with N25m Monthly Transactions to FIRS
NIBSS: Active Bank Accounts in Nigeria Hit 320m
FG Collaborates with China to Digitalize Customs
Glo Boosts Network Capacity for Enhanced Customer Experience
InfraCredit, AMDA Sign Partnership to Unlock Local Financing for Africa’s Mini-grid Sector
E-Business2 days agoHuawei Unveils AI Computing System to Challenge Nvidia’s Flagship Product
E-Financial2 days agoUnion Bank Rewards Customers with ₦5 Million Each in Save and Win Palli Promo Season 4 Grand Finale
E-Financial2 days agoEdun, Finance Minister Inaugurates NDIC New Management
General News2 days agoNew Tax Law Empowers NRS to Fine Offenders up to N10m
News2 days agoLawyers Drags NLS to Court for Alleged Election Fraud, Data Violation
Telecom23 hours agoGlo Boosts Network Capacity for Enhanced Customer Experience
Broadcasting2 days agoCourt Upholds AVRS Legal Rights to Licence Audiovisual Works in Hotels
News23 hours agoTranscorp Power Posts Strong Half-Year Profit, Declares ₦11.25Bn Dividend