The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has called on President Bola Tinubu to direct the Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, Bosun Tijani, to immediately withdraw the Lawful Interception of Communications Regulations, 2019, describing them as “unconstitutional, unlawful and inconsistent with Nigeria’s international obligations.”
In a late Saturday statement signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said that the regulations establish a sweeping mass surveillance regime that violates Nigerians’ constitutionally and internationally guaranteed human rights, including to privacy and freedom of expression.
According to the statement, SERAP also urge the President to urgently initiate a transparent and inclusive legislative process to ensure that any lawful interception framework fully complies with constitutional safeguards, judicial oversight requirements, and Nigeria’s international obligations.
The statement revealed that the request followed allegations made by the former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, that the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu’s phone conversation was intercepted, justifying the actions by citing the similar precedents set by the government.
Read Also
- Tinubu Committed to $1Tr Digital Economy, Says Communications Minister
- SERAP Sues Minister Adelabu, NBET Over ‘Failure' To Account For Missing N128bn Power Sector Funds
- SERAP Sues Govs, Wike Over Security Vote Fund Spending Amid Growing Insurgency
- SERAP Sues INEC Over Unaccounted N55.9bn 2019 Election Fund
El Rufai said, “The NSA’s call was tapped. They do that to our calls too, and we heard him saying they should arrest me.”
According to SERAP, the Regulations grant overly broad and vague powers to intercept communications on grounds such as ‘national security,’ ‘economic wellbeing,’ and ‘public emergency,’ without adequate judicial safeguards, independent oversight, transparency, or effective remedies.
SERAP said, “Serious interferences with fundamental rights cannot be authorised through subsidiary regulations or exercised in secrecy without strict safeguards.”
“Surveillance measures that lack strict necessity, proportionality and independent judicial oversight can easily be weaponised against political opponents, journalists, civil society actors and election observers,” the statement concluded.
