Rising Wave of Hate Messages

The authorities appear overwhelmed by the cacophony of hate messages flying around‎, a weakness that has heightened ethnic tension across the country, writes Tobi Soniyi

That there is an upsurge in hate speeches in recent time is no longer news. What many find bewildering however, is the inability of government to respond decisively to the issue.

During general elections, hate speeches are always on the rise. The 2015 elections witnessed an unprecedented increase in the use of hate speeches. The situation became so worrisome that the National Human Rights Commission had to issue a statement calling for restrain. This call however, went unheeded. Now election is not here yet but the exchanges of insults against ethnic groups and individuals had begun to crescendo. 

Before he was charged with treason, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOD), Nnamdi Kanu took it as his personal right to call other tribes all sorts of names while seeking independence for his people. The approach initially was to ignore him. However, when it became obvious that he was undermining the authorities, he was arrested and charged to court. The case is still pending in court. 

Along the line, faceless groups have taken to the social media to insult other peoples’ religion and ethnicity. Highly placed people including former ministers had resorted to using languages that denigrated the country they were once so proud of when they held sway as ministers.

While expressing deep concern over hate speech, the Director General of the National Orientation Agency, Dr Garba Abari said: “The latest disturbing aspect of this trend is that of hate songs. NOA is in possession of at least three songs already recorded to preach hate in our communities. Two out of these songs are in mass circulation in the social media, particularly on Facebook and Youtube,”

As a former governor of Edo State, Adams Oshiomhole rightly observed, once you are out of job politically, you tend not to see anything good about the country. But if they are ministers and their government is in power, then the country is okay. 

While the nation was gradually getting tired of Kanu and his IPOB crusade, a coalition of Arewa youths brought him back to the limelight when they gave Igbos living in the north an October 1st ultimatum to leave the region. This clearly was a violation of the constitution which guarantees freedom of movement and allows people to reside wherever they choose, but it also signalled a rise in the political tension in the country.

Interestingly, the Arewa youths were not challenged by the authority. Unlike Kanu, who was a subject of series of harassments, arrest and subsequent arraignment in court, the Arewa youths were allowed to roam unchallenged or cautioned. So they became emboldened and renewed their ultimatum. 

What is Hate Speech?

The 1999 Constitution as amended, in section 39(1) provides for freedom of expression. However, this freedom which is also known as freedom of speech is not absolute. Indeed, no freedom is absolute.

In order to prevent anarchy, individual rights are curtailed so that other members of the society can also enjoy their rights.

While people are free to express themselves, there is a need to balance this from inciting speeches. The balance obviously is very delicate but the devil, of course will always be in the details. Countries grow on ideas; therefore citizens must be free to express their ideas. However, inciting one ethnic group against another will be freedom of speech taking too far. 

One of the broadest definitions of hate speech is provided by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe as, “covering all forms of expression which spread, incite, promote or justify racial hatred, xenophobia, anti- Semitism or other forms of hatred based on intolerance, including: intolerance expressed by aggressive nationalism and ethnocentrism, discrimination and hostility against minorities, migrants and people of immigrant origin”.

In simple time, hate speech is one that is intended to insult, offend or intimidate another person because of certain traits such as race, religion, tribe, sexual orientation, disability among others. 

What is Fuelling Hate Speech in Recent Time?

In Nigeria, the failure of government to deliver has resulted in sectional agitation for restructuring, devolution of power and in some extreme cases, secession. These agitations are often accompanied by hate messages.

Recently, the National Peace Committee headed by former Military Head of State, Gen. Abdulsalam Abubakar, (rtd) blamed politicians who failed to deliver dividends of democracy to their people as the being behind the clamour for Nigeria’s break-up. 

The committee said that the manifestation of rising discontent among the populace was an indication that there was bad governance in Nigeria.

In a statement issued by its Secretary, Authur-Martins Aginam in Abuja, the committee warned that such action was not in the interest of the country and its people. The statement was co-signed by Abubakar, who is the National Chairman and Bishop Matthew Kukah, the convener of the group.

The committee said, “In this regard, the National Peace Committee acknowledges that the drums of rising division also reflect the perceptions by our citizens that there is poor governance in Nigeria today.

“Politicians who have failed in delivering on the mandate of the electorate for better livelihoods and neighbourhoods have, instead, found common cause with advocates of division and hate.

“In many parts of the country, young people who have been left without means of livelihood or hope in their future have become converts to radicalisation preached by demagogues in various guises including ethnicity and religion.” The committee warned. 

Government’s Reaction to Hate Speech 

All over the world, governments are put in place to solve problems and resolve issues, but in Nigeria, government is good only at apportioning blames, evading and abdicating its responsibility. When the Minister of Internal Affairs, Abdulrahman Dambazau, was asked what the Federal Government was doing to tackle hate speech, he replied with the usual rhetoric: government will deal decisively with any person or group involved in hate speech or inciting the public to cause break down of law and order.

 Dambazau said the warning became necessary following series of threats and counter-threats directed at ethnic groups and the need to maintain law and order.

He stressed that as the minister responsible for public safety and security,‎ proactive measures has been put in place to ensure safety of lives and property of Nigerians irrespective of their ethnic groups and where they resided.

“I wish to reassure the public of government’s commitment to protect lives and property, as well as to ensure the sanctity and integrity of the national space.

“All those found inciting public disobedience or preaching violence and hatred under‎ any guise whatsoever will be made to face the full wrath of the law,” he said.

Above all, he said a draft bill for the prosecution of people who engage in hate speeches had been submitted to the Ministry of Justice on the matter.

He insisted that hate speeches must never be allowed in Nigeria since nobody determined the tribe he or she belonged to.

Asked why it was difficult to prosecute those perpetrating hate speeches, he said, “We just submitted a draft bill to the Ministry of Justice on hate speech. That draft speech is supposed to go as an executive bill after getting to the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami. That draft bill contains the laws and punishment for hate speech.

“Hate speech should not be allowed in this country; everybody is entitled to belong to the religion he believes in. I mean people don’t choose the tribe to be, that’s how God brought them and there is absolutely no reason for hate speech. 

“So, if the National Assembly passes that law, certainly anybody who is engaged in hate speech will be prosecuted in accordance with the law,” Dambazau said. 

If Dambazau’s response is anything to go by, then there will be no punishment for hate speech. This is because the bill he referred to is not likely to pass before the end of the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari.

No Need for a New Law 

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria and author of many constitutional books, Mr Sebastine Hon while reacting to the position of the Federal Government on hate speech said:  “With due respect, the Federal Government is merely playing the ostrich on this issue. There are enough criminal and penal provisions in our statute books to take care of hate speeches. For instance, both in the Criminal Code and in the Penal Code, there are provisions criminalising incitement and conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace.

“Let me use this opportunity to warn that Nigeria is haemorrhaging most dangerously and in a manner too fast to be imagined. Never since the end of the civil war on January 15, 1970, have we faced such fractious threats to our existence as a nation. Government and all stakeholders, and indeed all Nigerians, must rise to the occasion.

“On the part of the Government, I strongly counsel that it must immediately and honestly, laying aside ethnic and political considerations, arrest and arraign the purveyors of these hate speeches.”

A former Chairman of the Governing Council of the National Human Rights Commission, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu could not agree more when he said: “Of course we have existing provisions in the Criminal Code, Penal Code, the Criminal Law of Lagos State (2011) Electoral Act all dealing with hate speech. We don’t need a new law to address hate speech. 

An Abuja based legal practitioner, Dr Kayode Ajulo also disagreed with the minister.

According to him, both the criminal code and the penal code make provisions for the law of sedition, which is the main law that regulates such aspect of hate speech and toxic public opinion on the government and its activities in a way that such opinions are not malignant and do not constitute threats to public peace.

“Having established that the Criminal Code in Section 50(2) and the Penal Code in Section 416 provide for the law of sedition which is the main law regulating hate speech, it is now up to the government to impose and make use of this law in regulating hate speech. 

“Nigerian government should not look for spurious excuses as a cover up for their inaction and negligence but should be pragmatic enough to embolden their institutional bodies/agencies solely responsible for applying this law and imposing punishments on individuals in violation of these laws.

“In every democratic society, each and every member of the society is granted the right to freedom of expression. In Nigeria, this right is contained in the provision of S. 39 of the 1999 Constitution.

“However, this right comes with its own limitations. If this freedom is left unfettered, it is sure to be abused by members of the society. This is why it is provided for in S. 39 (3) and S. 45 (1) of the Constitution that the provisions of S. 39 would not invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.”

Sedition can be aptly defined as any act, speech or publication that is done with a seditious intention. Seditious intention has been defined by the provision of S. 50 (2) of the Criminal Code. The offence of sedition attempts to strike a balance between Freedom of Expression as enshrined in section 39(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the security of the state.  

“But, in criticising government, a person or the press is allowed to keep his opinions within the limits of fair criticism. What is not permitted is to criticise the government in a malignant manner. For such attacks in their nature affect public peace. Therefore what the law of sedition seeks to achieve is the prevention of an unconstitutional overthrow of government or a breach of peace through virulent and malignant attacks on the government,” Ajulo explains

Ajulo enjoined those in authorities to encore the law and stop looking for excuses.

 He said: “Having established that there are indeed laws regulating hate speech in Nigeria it is necessary and of utmost importance that institutional bodies are set up to impose these laws and also punish individuals who violate these laws. This is lawful as the punishment for the offence of sedition is provided for in the Criminal Code in Section 51.” 

A Different Perspective

For Lagos lawyer and activist, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, the concept of hate speech is an anomaly. He said: “First, I do not agree on the concept of hate speeches. The Constitution in section 39 has granted an unqualified freedom of expression to every citizen. If any speech made has violated any body’s right at all, there is the extant common law remedy of libel actions for damages in civil cases and criminal libel in criminal cases. It has now become common place for government and government officials to seek to gag the people by seeking all manner of restraint of the freedom of speech.

“To that extent, I don’t agree on the concept of hate speeches. Every citizen should be allowed the freedom of expression under the law.

“Secondly, I believe that the National Assembly lacks the legal competence in law to pass into law any bill seeking to gag citizens. Such a law, if ever passed, will run counter to section 1 of the 1999 Constitution which has declared the constitution to be the supreme law. 

“Any law capable of hindering the freedom of expression granted under section 39 of the 1999 Constitution and the African Charter will be illegal and unconstitutional. To that extent, the National Assembly has no power to make any law that will violate the constitution. It is ultra vires. 

“It is in the light of the above that I find it difficult to agree with Mr Danbazau that there is need for a new law to regulate what people term as hate speeches. This is just an attempt by the ruling APC government to gag citizens and if such law is ever passed, we shall challenge it in court.” 

Protection for Individuals and Public Orders

Laws placing restrictions on freedom of speech can be categorised into two types: those which are designed for public order and those which are designed to protect human dignity. Defamation laws (libel and slander) are aimed at protecting people’s good characters while sedition is aimed at protecting public order and safety.‎

NOA’s #Say No to Hate Speech Campaign on Social Media

The National Orientation Agency said it had embarked on strategic campaign on social media platforms to reach the youths and confront hate speech and intolerance. The campaign on social media platform is tagged: #Say No To Hate Speech.

Dr Garba Abari, the Director-General, NOA, expressed concern about the rising wave of hate messages in circulation in the country, even as he urged journalists, media organisations and digital citizens to join in the effort to increase the visibility of the campaign on social media.

He also appealed to digital citizens on social media to refrain from hate speeches.

He said: “Please, do not share posts, retweet or spread any message containing any form of hate speech against any individual, group, ethnic nationality or region.

 “There is an urgent need for all men and women of goodwill in Nigeria to take measures to curb hate speeches and promote national cohesion, love and unity.

 “We especially urge Nigerian celebrities to exhibit patriotism by volunteering to become national peace ambassadors at this crucial moment in our nationhood in order to effectively influence and stir the youths away from anti-peace tendencies.

“In the last few months, our country and its people have witnessed a disturbing trend in the social and political conversation that sometimes calls to question our tradition of friendship, love for neighbour and sense of unity.

 “This trend appears to give the impression that we have not learnt anything from our past and well thought out programmes of integration and unification have not yielded fruits,”

He appealed to Nigerians not to allow misunderstanding and lack of appreciation to blur the beautiful diversity for which the world admired the country.

 “NOA is against the level of division and hate that is being expressed in the conventional and social media and even on the streets about ourselves.

“If you look at the social media, a channel mostly used by our youths, you will notice that the voices of hate are what you hear. The government is concerned about this because that is not who we are.

 “Our country is known for its beautiful stories of love, unity and respect for each other. For more hundreds of years, the various communities in our country have had relationships that were consolidated at independence.”

He also said NOA would soon embark on a nationwide advocacy campaign against hate and intolerance, with a focus on leaders of thought in all states of the Federation. 

Inclusive Government to the Rescue

One of the ways to reduce tension, and by extension hate speech, is for the federal government to run the country in such a way that the rights of all Nigerians are protected and guaranteed. To a larger extent, the president must take the blame for the sudden rise in agitation. Since he was sworn in on May 29, 2015, President Muhammadu Buhari had carried on as if he was elected to be president of a section of the country alone. That is a tragic mistake for which the country is paying for now. It is never too late for the president to retrace his steps and prove to the south-south and the south-east that he is their president and that he cares about the people.

The Deputy Senate President, Dr Ike Ekwremadu captured the scenario very succinctly in a speech he delivered recently in Enugu when south-east governors, members of the National Assembly as from the zone as well as Igbo leaders of thought met.

 He said: “All these point to the fact that there is widespread dissatisfaction over how Nigeria is presently constituted and run. The South East region, in particular, has, no doubt, been at the worst receiving end of the structural imbalances with ripples of disequilibrium in the distribution of resources and opportunities since the end of the civil war in 1970. This, as we know, are at the root of the disquiet and agitation by various groups for a sovereign state of Biafra. 

 “Although the Biafra agitation has been with us even during the regimes of former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Yar’Adua, and Goodluck Jonathan, it was managed, through tact and semblance of inclusiveness. Thus, after Ralph Uwazulike’s arrest and release from detention by the Yar’Adua administration, the agitation withered greatly. It was even much less noticeable under the Jonathan Administration because the South East was given a greater sense of belonging.

 “Therefore, the renewed and aggravated agitations across the South East, the hero status of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), the growing pro-Biafra sentiments in the South East, and the widespread feelings of alienation and disgust with the Nigerian project since after the 2015 general election can be traced to the mistreatment of the region, which graduated from marginalization to exclusion, based on the 97 percent and 5 percent policy of the present administration.”