To say the least, 2019 was a year of many issues and controversies. From the arrest of journalist and pro-democracy campaigner, Omoyele Sowore to the closure of Nigeria’s land borders, the introduction of social media bill, anti-hate speech bill and the controversial $30 billion loan request and then the allocation of N37 billion for the renovation of the National Assembly, it was, indeed, a year full of engagements. They all elicited a barrage of reactions which crisscrossed and almost blurred religious and ethnic lines in the country, trended on social media, especially Twitter, heated up the polity and engendered public discourse. These issues raised the political consciousness of Nigerians as many spoke up using any available medium.
But among them lies one that holds a lot in itself – the anti-hate speech bill which, eventually, is our issue of the year. This bill, which the leadership of the eighth Senate refused to entertain, holds very severe implications if allowed to get to the table of Mr President for assent, the most significant being death sentence for anyone found guilty of spreading a falsehood that may lead to the death of another person. First introduced in March 2018 but failing to sail through to third reading, this unpopular bill found itself back to the floor of Nigerian Senate on November 5, 2019, as ‘National Commission for the Prohibition of Hate Speeches (Est, etc) Bill, 2019 (SB. 154)’ sponsored by Senator Abdullahi Aliyu, the deputy chief whip. The 55-section bill, the sponsor says, is needed at the nation’s current stage of development.
Death and life sentence
It describes hate speech as any material, written and or visual which is threatening, abusive or insulting or involves the use of threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, and a person who uses, publishes, presents, produces, plays, provides, distributes and/or directs the performance of such content commits an offence. If found guilty, the bill prescribes, such offender shall be liable to life imprisonment and where the act causes any loss of life, the person shall be punished with death by hanging. This section, particularly, has sparked off criticism, stirring uneasiness and fear. At a time when the United Nations is advocating the abolition of death sentence, the bill seeks to further entrench it in the country.
On ethnic discrimination, the bill seeks to penalise any person who discriminates against another person if, on ethnic grounds, the person without any lawful justification treats another Nigerian citizen less favourably than he treats or would treat other person from his ethnic or another ethnic group and/or that on grounds of ethnicity. Kicking against harassment based on ethnicity, it says a person may be guilty of ethnic harassment if he justifiably engages in a conduct which has the purpose or effect of violating that other person’s dignity or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for the person subjected to the harassment. Such a person commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not less than ten years, or to a fine of not less than N10 million, or to both
The commission and its functions
The bill seeks to establish a commission called Independent National Commission for the Prohibition of Hate Speech with the capacity to sue and be sued. It, also, has the capacity to purchase or otherwise acquire, hold, charge or dispose of movable and immovable property; borrow or lend money; as well as do or perform all other things or acts for the furtherance of the provision of the bill. Some of the functions of the bill are: to promote a harmonious peaceful co-existence within the people of all ethnic groups indigenous to Nigeria by ensuring the elimination of all forms of hate speeches in Nigeria, and to advise the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on all aspects thereof; without prejudice, promote the elimination of all forms of hate speeches against any person(s) or ethnic group indigenous to Nigeria and discourage persons, institutions, political parties and associations from advocating or promoting discrimination or discriminatory practices through the use of hate speeches.
Speedy reading
The bill, in a somewhat fast and suspicious manner, passed through the first and second reading at the red chambers, in about two weeks after its introduction, to the chagrin of rights groups and Nigerians. The controversial legislation, if becomes law, would further shrink the already comatose civic space in Nigeria, with the Cyber Crimes Act and the Anti-Terrorism Act already in place.
Religious bodies, Amnesty International kick
The uneasiness and stir it generated rippled through almost all strata of Nigerian society, as civic society organisations, religious bodies as well Amnesty International (AI) Nigeria, spoke up against the proposed law and its attendant effects on the freedom of expression in the country. The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), an umbrella body of Christians in Nigeria, described it as “an ill wind that will blow nobody any good.”
While AI Nigeria looked at it from the same prism as the social media bill, the organisation’s Programmes Manager, Seun Bakare, said “We are urging the Nigerian authorities to drop these bills, which are open to vague and broad interpretations and impose incredibly harsh punishments simply for criticizing the authorities.” The legality of the bill has also been a subject of debate and commentary by lawyers. Some argued that it would be void because it goes against the provision of the 1999 constitution, as amended, while others said it is not just hypocritical but would end up eroding the gains of Nigeria’s fledgling democracy. Popular among the views is that of Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, who said the bill was dead on arrival.
IBB, Atiku warn
In the growing dissent, former leaders did also voice their displeasure over the proposed law. Erstwhile military Head of State, General Ibrahim Babangida (retd), described it as an attempt to gag the press.
“There is no basis for this; now we are developing and we should be allowed to develop. If we make mistakes people can be cautioned; if somebody goes off, you have the right to call him to say ‘no we don’t want this,” he said.
The presidential candidate of PDP in the 2019 presidential election and former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, also, spoke against it, warning the sponsor of the bill and the federal government not to toy with the democracy which, according to him, PDD preserved from 1999 to 2015. He said: “Freedom of speech was not just bestowed to Nigerians by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), it is also a divine right given to all men by their creator. History is littered with the very many unintended consequences that result when this God given right is obstructed by those who seek to intimidate the people rather than accommodate them.”
Undeterred, daring sponsor
As the criticism blazed like harmattan fire, the sponsor of the bill felt undeterred, seizing every opportunity to preach it’s good news. Even after the Senate’s leadership clarified its position, stating that the bill was sponsored by the senator and does not reflect the position of the entire Senate, he still dared on.But then, he later promised to remove the death sentence part and dared to push it on. “I will not drop the bill. In the first instance, I sponsored this bill of my own volition. Nobody asked me to do so. I did all the research and I have my strong reasons for coming up with this. The bill on its own did not create any outrage. The bill is suffering from hate speech already because people have misinterpreted it”
As Nigerians embrace the New Year with high expectations, and permutations ahead of 2023 thicken, it is yet to be seen if the bill will come to the assent table of Mr President. But then, one thing is sure, this bill, among other issues, will remain in the front burner of political discourse, at least, in the first quarter of 2020.