STATE SURVEILLANCE AND RIGHT TO PRIVACY IN NIGERIA
INTRODUCTION
In the digital age, state surveillance has become a dominant feature of modern governance, often justified under the pretext of national security, public order, and crime prevention. However, this development has raised critical human rights concerns, particularly the infringement of the right to privacy. In Nigeria, technological advancements and an evolving security landscape have spurred the government's increasing interest in digital surveillance. This paper seeks to examine the legal framework governing state surveillance in Nigeria and its compatibility with constitutionally and internationally guaranteed rights to privacy.
The Right to Privacy: Meaning and Scope
The right to privacy is a multidimensional right encompassing personal autonomy, dignity, data protection, and freedom from arbitrary interference. Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR, 1948), Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966), and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR, 1981) all affirm this right.
In Nigeria, Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) guarantees “the privacy of citizens, their homes, correspondence, telephone conversations and telegraphic communications.”
Legal Instruments Governing Surveillance in Nigeria
1. Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015: Provides for lawful interception of electronic communications but lacks sufficient oversight mechanisms.
2. Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) Act: Grants the NCC regulatory powers, including access to subscriber information under certain conditions.
3. Nigerian Data Protection Regulation (NDPR), 2019: Establishes minimal safeguards for personal data, but enforcement remains weak.
Justifications for State Surveillance
The primary rationale for state surveillance is national security. The Nigerian government often cites threats posed by terrorism (e.g., Boko Haram), kidnapping, cybercrime, and secessionist movements to justify invasive surveillance tactics. While these threats are real, unchecked surveillance may lead to abuse, stifling of dissent, and erosion of democratic norms.
Surveillance Practices in Nigeria
Evidence has emerged over the past decade of Nigeria's acquisition of advanced surveillance tools such as spyware (e.g., FinFisher), drone technology, and phone tapping devices. Reports from civil society organizations, such as Paradigm Initiative and Amnesty International, indicate growing concern over covert surveillance against journalists, activists, and opposition figures (Paradigm Initiative, 2021).
The Nigerian government has also has developed capabilities to monitor internet usage and social media activity. During the #EndSARS protests of 2020, several activists reported account hacking, device tracking, and phone surveillance allegedly sanctioned by state agents (Amnesty International, 2020).
Implications on Human Rights
Surveillance programs, especially those lacking judicial oversight, directly infringe on the right to privacy. The use of blanket surveillance without a court warrant contradicts Section 37 of the Constitution and international human rights standards.
The knowledge or suspicion of being watched can deter citizens from exercising their rights to freedom of speech and association. According to Human Rights Watch (2021), digital surveillance in Nigeria has fostered an atmosphere of fear among human rights defenders and civil society groups.
Challenges of Regulating Surveillance in Nigeria
1. Lack of Oversight Mechanisms: Many surveillance activities occur without legislative or judicial control.
2. Weak Institutional Capacity: NDPR enforcement is undermined by lack of funding, staff, and public awareness.
3. Broad and Vague Legislation: Laws such as the Cybercrimes Act give excessive discretion to security agencies.
Recommendations
1. Legislative Reform: Amend the Cybercrimes Act to define clearer limits and incorporate judicial oversight.
2. Independent Oversight Body: Establish a statutory agency responsible for reviewing surveillance requests.
3. Judicial Safeguards: All surveillance operations should require prior approval from a competent court.
4. Transparency and Accountability: Require public reporting on the scope and use of surveillance powers.
5. Strengthen the NDPR: Empower the Nigeria Data Protection Bureau (NDPB) with enforcement tools and autonomy.
Conclusion
While surveillance is a legitimate tool for ensuring national security, it must not come at the expense of constitutional and internationally protected human rights. Nigeria’s legal regime must be reformed to reflect the principles of necessity, proportionality, legality, and transparency. Upholding the right to privacy in the digital age is essential to preserving democracy, freedom of expression, and civic space.
References
Amnesty International. (2020). Nigeria: Authorities must stop targeting #EndSARS protesters. https://www.amnesty.org/
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015.
Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.
Nigerian Data Protection Regulation (NDPR), 2019.
Paradigm Initiative. (2021). Digital Rights in Africa Report 2020. https://paradigmhq.org/
Article by Ayawari Tom Ebibo
Photocredit: Unsplash