Cyberbullying, Toyin Abraham & #FreeAyo: Examining the boundaries of the Nigerian cybercrime law

The social media storm surrounding the #FreeAyo X trend has reignited discussions about cyberbullying and its far-reaching consequences. Ayo has now been released after calls by netizens, especially by owners of big social media accounts. 

Another X user, @YVRLO, also accused her of arresting his mother at her shop.  

"It's one thing to make a tweet, and you arrest me. It's another thing to arrest me for not even making a single comment, @toyin_abraham1. You picked my mom up from her shop to Panti police station for something I didn't even do. God will judge you."

But, the arrests, reportedly at the behest of popular Nigerian actress Toyin Abraham for cyberbullying and defamation, have brought these issues to the forefront. 

Understanding Cyberbullying

According to UNICEF, Cyberbullying is bullying with the use of digital technologies. It can occur on social media, messaging platforms, gaming platforms and mobile phones. It is repeated behaviour, aimed at scaring, angering or shaming those targeted. Examples include:

1. Spreading lies about or posting embarrassing photos or videos of someone on social media
2. Sending hurtful, abusive or threatening messages, images or videos via messaging platforms
3. Impersonating someone and sending mean messages to others on their behalf or through fake accounts

The Cybersmile Foundation gives a slightly different definition: 

Cyberbullying is used as an umbrella term to describe many different kinds of online abuse including harassment, doxing, reputation attacks, revenge porn, slut shaming, cyberstalking, swatting, corporate attacks, account hacking, and false profiles.

This behaviour can have a profound impact on victims, especially in a society like Nigeria where reputation – albeit hypocritically – holds immense value.

Defamation explained

Defamation, the core of Toyin Abraham’s claims, can be emotionally and socially devastating. In Nigeria’s close-knit communities, defamatory statements can lead to:

1. Social ostracism: Being shunned or excluded from social circles – a form of “cancel culture” with significant emotional distress.
2. Mental health issues: Anxiety, depression, and helplessness are common consequences of defamation.
3. Professional repercussions: Damaged reputations can lead to business losses, demotions, or even job loss. A typical example is Erisco foods’ claims of business losses. 
4. Public figures, like celebrities, might experience a decline in public support. The #FreeAyo trend enthusiasts called for Toyin’s works to be boycotted and tagged Netflix to take her movies off the platform. 
5. Financial strain: Legal fees, lost income, and reputation management costs can take a significant financial toll.

The wider circle of impact: The impact of defamation can extend beyond the immediate target. In traditional Nigerian society, where family and community ties are strong, accusations against an individual can damage the reputation of their entire family, amplifying the distress.

The Nigerian legal Landscape

In Nigeria, the absence of a specific law addressing cyberbullying is a notable gap in the legal framework. 

The Nigerian Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act of 2015, while comprehensive in addressing various cybercrimes such as hacking, identity theft, and cyberstalking, does not explicitly address cyberbullying. 

The Act provides an effective, unified and comprehensive legal, regulatory and institutional framework for the prohibition, prevention, detection, prosecution and punishment of cybercrimes in Nigeria. This act also ensures the protection of critical national information infrastructure and promotes cybersecurity and the protection of computer systems and networks, electronic communications, data and computer programs, intellectual property and privacy rights.

The apparent lack of specific legislation (In fact, it does not mention “cyberbully” or “cyberbullying”) means that victims of cyberbullying may have limited recourse under the law, as existing provisions may not fully encompass the unique nature of online harassment and bullying.

However, Section 24 addresses the issue of cyberstalking, as it makes it an offence to knowingly or intentionally send messages or content via computer systems or networks that are grossly offensive, pornographic, indecent, obscene, or menacing. 

It also criminalises sending messages known to be false for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill-will, or needless anxiety to another person. 

Offenders can face a fine of up to 7 million naira or imprisonment for up to three years, or both​.

While Section 24 covers certain aspects of harmful online behaviour, it has been criticised for its broad and vague language, which can potentially infringe on freedom of expression. 

For instance, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Court of Justice ruled that this section violates international human rights standards, and recommended its amendment to better align with democratic principles. 

ECOWAS ruling  

In 2022, The ECOWAS Court ruled that Section 24 of the Nigerian Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015, violates international human rights standards, specifically Article 9(2) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which states that “Every individual shall have the right to express and disseminate his opinions within the law.” 

The ambiguous Section 24 also violates 19(1, 2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which reads: 

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.
2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.

However 19(3) states: 

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:

(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others;

(b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals.

Yet, the ECOWAS court found that the section’s broad and vague terms, such as “grossly offensive” and “menacing character,” could be used to unjustly limit freedom of expression. Consequently, the court ordered Nigeria to repeal or amend Section 24 to align with its international obligations. 

However, the Nigerian government has yet to implement comprehensive legislation specifically targeting cyberbullying, leaving a significant gap in legal protection against online harassment​. 

This now brings us to ask why free speech is important. 

In Nigeria, free speech is enshrined in Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, and guarantees the right to freedom of expression and the free flow of ideas and information.

Section 39: 

(1.) Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) of this section, every person shall be entitled to own, establish and operate any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas and opinions

This right is crucial for fostering a vibrant public discourse, holding authorities accountable, and promoting transparency and good governance. However, the increasing prevalence of online harassment presents significant challenges that need to be addressed. 

Cyberbullying and other forms of online abuse can cause severe emotional and psychological harm, damage reputations, and even threaten the safety of individuals. 

Balancing these needs involves crafting laws that protect individuals from online abuse without unduly restricting freedom of expression. This approach promotes a healthy and secure online environment while upholding the democratic values of free speech.

Further comments on the arrests

“You can abuse me and call me names; it is fine, and as I said, I will accept and take it in cos I’m in the public eyes, but cursing my kids and lying is what I won’t accept...I made a report on cybercrime as a citizen.” 

“I made my report at cybercrime cos the threat to life and curse and threat on my family were beyond what I can take. As for me, abuse me, insult me please, say anything to me please,” Toyin Abraham wrote.

In Nigeria, Toyin, like any private citizen, does not have the legal authority to arrest someone or order the arrest of anyone. However, she can report threats against her son to the police. 

When a person’s life is threatened, the appropriate course of action is to file a complaint with the Nigerian Police Force, who then investigate the matter and take necessary legal actions.

In this case, Toyin claimed she reported the threat made by the Twitter user to the police. The police then acted on this report, leading to the user’s arrest for cyberbullying and making threats. This process aligns with Nigerian law, where the police are responsible for handling criminal complaints. 

However, there’s a debate about whether Toyin Abraham overstepped by involving the police instead of pursuing legal action through a civil lawsuit. Ultimately, this is a matter for the courts to determine.