How Senate Overlooks Public Outcry on Social Media Bill
POLITICS DIGEST – Stakeholders had raised concerns about the recruitment process of the upper legislative chamber leadership, in the days leading to the inauguration of the 9th Senate.
The concerns were predominantly borne of fears that the active involvement of the presidency and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) would produce a rubber stamp leadership that will be subservient to the Executive arm.
Another critical consideration was the concern about the loyalty of the leadership of the Senate – loyalty to the people or to President Muhammadu Buhari. President of the Senate, Ahmad Lawan, during his campaign, repeatedly made a solemn vow to always be on the side of the people.
With the controversy dotting the planned passage of a Social Media Bill and the alleged refusal of Lawan-led Senate to defer to the popular demand of Nigerians to jettison the move, stakeholders are raising questions on the independence of the Parliament without a subtle control from the Executive arm.
They are also raising questions on the coincidence between the proposed regulation of the social media and unrelenting moves by the Senate to give it a legislative backing. They are wondering if it is a case of the hand of Esau and the voice of Jacob.
The new bill tagged: “Protection from Internet Falsehood and Manipulations”, was sponsored by Senator Musa Sani from Niger State. The bill which has passed second reading on the floor of the Senate, has been referred to the Committee on Judiciary and Legal Matters.
The panel is expected to submit the report in four weeks after holding a public hearing where Nigerians and other stakeholders will make contributions.
In 2016, the 8th Senate, tried without success to pass the same bill. Bukola Saraki-led Senate caved in to the public and abandoned the bill which was sponsored by Senator Bala Ibn N’Allah.
Sponsor of the new Bill, Musa, while leading the debate, said the proposal is not an attempt to stifle free speech. Instead, he claimed that it is an attempt to address the growing threats which have been left unchecked.
He said: “This bill is not an attempt to stifle free speech. It is rather an opportunity to address the growing threats which left unchecked, can cause serious damage in our polity and disrupt peaceful existence.
“While the internet has made information possible, the fact remains that it has also been a weapon in the process which is why governments across the world are trying to mitigate the risks associated with information transmission via internet by monitoring abuse and deliberate misconducts.
“One of the disadvantages of the internet is the spread of falsehood and manipulation of unsuspecting users. Today, motivated by geo-political interest and identity politics, state and non- state actors use internet to discredit government, misinform people and and turn one group against the other.
“The hoax about the demise of president Muhammadu Buhari in London and his purpoted replacement by one Jibril of Sudan, among others, are things that threaten the peace, security and harmony of our people.
“Inauthentic online accounts run by human trolls have been used to rapidly spread falsehood. For media outets, publishing a story with false contents that attracts users, benefits advertisers.”
Read Also:
Explaining clauses and other components of the bill, the sponsor said: “Penalty for defaulters goes up to N300,000 for individuals and up tp N10 million for corporate organisations and imprisonment of up to three years or both.
Unlike previous bills that were opposed by some senators, beside Chimaroke Nnamani, every lawmaker who was present on the floor when the bill was read for the second time, supported it.
Nnamani said the passage of the Bill will negate the principles of free speech. He said the existing Cyber Crime Act has addressed the issues raised in the bill.
“I not only opose this bill, I condemn it in its entirety. Based on our constitution, there is freedom of information and freedom of speech.
“There is a Cyber Crime Act that deals with this issue. There are also laws that deal with false informtion, libel, slander and so on.
“Yes, fake news has done a lot in America and other countries, but they have not brought any law to deal with it. I therefore oppose this bill.”
Despite the unrelenting effort by the Senate to pass the bill, Senators elected on the platform of the Peooles Democratic Party (PDP), said they will oppose the move.
Speaking on behalf of opposition senators, Minority Leader of the upper legislative chamber, Enyinnaya Abaribe, said the right thing will be done.
Abaribe said there are already laws that deal with the issues the proposed law seeks to achieve. He, however, urged Nigerians to respect the rights of others while expressing their views.
Abaribe said: “There is no speed with which this bill is being passed. The first reading of a bill is automatic. We can’t make a comment on what is still on the first stage.
“What I can assure you is that this Senate can’t be a party to removing the rights of Nigerians under any. Section 39 of the Constitution talks about our freedom as citizens. The 9th Senate will not abridge your rights.
“I don’t think Nigerians who fought and paid the supreme to entrench this democracy will easily give it away and make us go back to the dark days. Rest assured that when we get to that point, we will stand for the people. Every bill that passes here must pass through the rigours to ensure that it protects the rights of over 200 million Nigerians.
“We have a plethora of laws that can be used to drive the question of driving a free society. While social media can be good, it can also be bad. I am a victim of social media.
“As much as there is freedom, yours stops where another person’s own starts. We urge Nigerians not to propagate falsehood or fake news. Our job is to guarantee the freedoms and rights of both sides.”
Head of Leadership and Accountability Initiative, Mr. Nwaruruahu Shield, in his intervention, has also argued that since there were already existing laws, it will be irrelevant to promote new anti-social media restrictions.
He said: “It is imperative to note that there is already existing provisions in the Nigeria constitution which define in plain terms about defamation which states that: A defamation matter is defined in section 373 of the criminal code as a matter likely to injure the reputation of any person by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule or likely to damage any person in his profession or trade by injury to his reputation.
“Seeing that Nigeria has more than enough laws such as the section 373 of the criminal code, the Cybercrimes 2015 Act and other existing laws, it has become obvious that what the sponsor(s) (covertly and overtly) of this bill seek to do is to gag the socialmedia and dictate to us what we can say and what not.”
