By Juliana Francis
As preparations gradually build toward Nigeria’s 2027 general elections, civil society organisations and experts have begun conversations aimed at sensitising law enforcement agencies, security institutions, politicians, and voters on the need to protect civic space and ensure citizens can participate freely in the democratic process.
One of the organisations leading this effort is Spaces for Change (S4C), which recently convened a stakeholder consultative dialogue in Ikeja, Lagos State, to discuss surveillance technology and its implications for civic freedoms.
The forum, titled “Building Multisectoral Partnership for Online Safety and Security in Nigeria,” brought together lawyers, media practitioners, civil society organisations, and public sector representatives.
It also featured the presentation of S4C’s latest report, “Civic Space in West Africa: Trends, Threats and Futures,” the second edition of the organisation’s regional analysis.
Welcoming participants, S4C Executive Director, Victoria Ibezim-Ohaeri, opened the first panel session, which focused on “Targeted Surveillance and Civic Space in West Africa: Impact and Accountability.”
One of the panellists, Amanim Akpabio, an Associate Professor in the Department of Private Law at the University of Uyo, said citizens and activists must take proactive steps to challenge rights violations.
“A problem exists, yet we do not take steps to address it. It’s not just a question of bad laws or leadership. There should not be selective checks and balances. A court will not, on its own, begin to demand the release of persons illegally detained.
“Activists need to move the courts to act. Sometimes protests work, but well-documented petitions that raise public awareness can also drive change,” he said.
Also speaking, Amarachi Okonkoh, a data privacy and digital infrastructure specialist at GEPLAW, warned that digital surveillance could be abused under the guise of fighting crime.
“One of the greatest threats in Nigeria today is digital surveillance carried out under claims of treason or other crimes. The Constitution guarantees privacy, and if that right must be breached, it must follow lawful procedures. Nigerians should be able to question whether the actions of government agencies are necessary or if there are alternative options. Citizens must have avenues to challenge illegal surveillance,” she said.
Providing a government perspective, Abdullahi Abubakar Aliyu, Deputy Manager at the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), clarified that his comments were personal views.
“Government consists of a multitude of agencies, and surveillance often happens without public awareness. If it is used to track crime, people may support it. But if it can be used against anyone indiscriminately, that becomes illegal and problematic,” he said.
Aliyu explained that surveillance exists in two forms: government and the private sector, adding that Nigeria should begin developing local solutions and stronger oversight.
“Foreign technologies are already deployed for surveillance. We need oversight bodies and procurement registers to track what technologies are brought into the country. There should also be human rights assessments and audits of such tools. Civil society organisations must be involved so agencies can be held accountable for breaches,” he said.
He also recalled the economic impact of the previous Twitter shutdown, noting that many Nigerians now rely on internet-based platforms for their livelihoods.
Responding to questions about whether the judiciary has been weaponised in surveillance-related matters, Akpabio said the issue may lie more in capacity gaps than deliberate bias.
“I will not say the judiciary is weaponised, but it can be weaponised. Many judges do not fully understand surveillance technology. On the surface, everything may appear lawful, but deeper analysis often reveals the real implications. Judges need training in digital surveillance before making such judgments,” he said.
He added that beyond corruption, judges may also face threats from the executive arm or security risks, including kidnapping, which can influence judicial decisions.
“There is a need to strengthen both the security of judges and their technical knowledge through continuous training and retraining,” he said.
Okonkoh also urged Nigerians whose rights have been violated to test the law in court.
“How many times have we gone to court to challenge state actors over illegal surveillance? We need to test the law. If government or private entities carry out unlawful surveillance, we should approach the judiciary,” she said.
Aliyu added that surveillance technologies should be deployed primarily to combat insurgency and terrorism rather than target citizens.
“We need to operate within established laws. Engage with agencies, reach out to NITDA, and call our attention if we are doing anything wrong,” he said.
The second panel session focused on “From Export to Deployment: Legal and Regulatory Accountability in Surveillance Technology Proliferation.”
Speaking during the session, technology lawyer Rotimi Ogunyemi, a partner at BOC Legal, expressed concern over emerging technologies that remain largely unregulated.
“There are advanced technologies without proper regulation, and those are what we should be worried about. Artificial intelligence (AI) tools can be downloaded and used to track individuals,” he said.
He argued that the National Office for Technology Acquisition and Promotion (NOTAP) should play a stronger role in regulating the transfer of foreign technologies into Nigeria.
According to him, any company seeking to pay foreign entities for software licences, trademarks, or technical services must register such agreements with NOTAP to enable legal remittance of funds through the Central Bank of Nigeria.
“NOTAP is not pulling its weight. It should be more active in regulating technology inflow. Judicial oversight is also weak because many judges are not familiar with surveillance technologies,” Ogunyemi said.
Also speaking, Atinuke Ibrahim, Manager of Regulatory Affairs at the Association of Licensed Telecom Operators of Nigeria (ALTON), explained how telecom companies handle lawful data requests.
“Telecom operators typically require a warrant for interventions. These requests often come from law enforcement or relevant government bodies. Under lawful intervention, we are obligated to comply,” she said.
She added that only certain agencies, such as the Office of the National Security Adviser and the Department of State Services, can be connected for lawful interception, while law enforcement agencies must submit written requests signed by senior officers before data can be released.
“We can provide data to agencies like the EFCC or ICPC, but not to just anyone. The Nigerian Communications Commission must also issue instructions before connections to third parties are made. Once data is handed over to security agencies, we do not control how it is used. We call it lawful intervention. We are not the ones surveilling citizens,” she said.
Meanwhile, Ade Atobatele of Remarkable Idea Ltd argued that insecurity persists partly because it has become profitable for some actors.
“Insecurity continues because it is profitable. With the right tools, many security challenges could be addressed quickly. Anyone with a smartphone can potentially be tracked, but jurisdiction and enforcement remain major challenges,” he said.
He also warned that artificial intelligence is rapidly changing the surveillance landscape.
“AI today is one of the biggest challenges in surveillance. Some AI systems are designed purely for tracking and can gather extensive information within a short time,” he said.
During the event, Judith Chiamaka, Digital Rights Programme Associate at S4C, and Michael Itegbe, Technology Officer at S4C, reviewed the organisation’s report.
They explained that the report is a longitudinal analysis of civic space trends across 16 West African countries. The first edition, published in 2023, analysed 639 incidents between 2017 and 2022, while the latest edition expands the dataset to 801 incidents recorded between 2022 and 2024.
According to them, the findings reveal accelerating patterns of democratic erosion and emerging threats to civic freedoms across the region.
The report also provides projections about the future of civic space in West Africa through retrospective analysis of past trends. It enables human rights defenders to filter incidents of civic freedom crackdowns, identify perpetrators and locations, and analyse tactics used.
“Using the database, civil society organisations can identify high-risk areas and direct their efforts and resources where they are most needed to achieve optimal outcomes,” Itegbe said.
