As days unfold, it seems every political leader in Nigeria is deeply concerned about how all sorts of deviant acts would be tactically flushed out of the country’s system in its entirety.
This is perhaps the reason different forms of bills pertaining to criminality or social deviance won’t cease to flood the country’s various lawmaking chambers, both at the federal and state levels.
A few years back, in the National Assembly (NASS), there was a certain bill on the floor of the hallowed chamber that’s targeted at ending every kind of ‘hate speech’, which was the order of the day mainly on the new media platform otherwise referred to as the social media. It’s being sponsored by the Spokesman of the Red Chamber, Senator Aliyu Abdullahi.
Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 16 (Feb 10 – May 3, 2025) opens registrations; register today for early bird discounts.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations here.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and invest in Africa’s finest startups here.
The bill, which sought establishment of an ‘Independent National Commission for Hate Speech’ that would enforce hate speech laws across the country as well as advise the federal government in that regard, if passed into law, shall grant a ‘not less than five-year jail term or a fine of not less than N10 million, or both, for offenses such as harassment on the grounds of ethnicity or racial contempt.
Among other prescriptions captured in the amazing bill, it further advocates that upon conviction, hate speech offenders ought to face the hangman’s noose; meaning literally that a convicted culprit shall be facing a death sentence by hanging. The particular clause that sought capital punishment actually concerns hate speech that resulted in the death of someone.
The bill, if eventually signed into law, would unequivocally be in disagreement with Section 39 (1) of the Nigerian 1999 Constitution, as amended, that allows freedom of expression. The said section empowers Nigerians to freely hold opinions as well as receive and impart ideas cum information without interference. Hence, the NASS probably was equally thinking of how to amend this very section.
Criminalizing an activity – free speech – that showcases the true mark of any democratic terrain was enough indication that the people elected to represent Nigerians had abruptly turned against their collective existence. The truth is that, the so-called hate speech does not in any way deserves to be tagged a criminal act let alone warranting a death sentence.
It’s mind boggling that that was happening at a time every bloc across the globe, particularly the United Nations (UN), was seriously condemning prescription of capital punishment as a penalty for any kind of conviction whatsoever.
It came at an era when rational thinkers consider such a type of sentence as barbaric and archaic; at a period various civil societies are advocating life imprisonment as the greatest punishment to be served by any court of law irrespective of the nature of the offense.
The reason life sentence should be preferred to that of death has overtime been made clear. One might be erroneously sentenced, thus if such person is serving a life imprisonment, the judgment could be revisited in the long run when an authentic alibi, or as may be the case, is eventually tendered to the court that convicted him/her. Hence, it’s retrogressive for any legislature to advocate capital penalty in this 21st century.
Besides, it’s baffling to acknowledge that till date, the legislators are yet to sponsor a bill that would prescribe the hangman’s noose upon conviction as regards a case involving looting.
It’s indeed amusing, to assert the least, that this set of elected officers Nigerians look up to is still finding it difficult to align with the popular notion that looters ostensibly deserve capital punishment if convicted.
Why would someone who indulge in an act (looting) that could render thousands of Nigerians jobless and equally results in untimely death of several others be allowed to walk freely and boldly on the streets, but one who expresses his/her feelings or opinions toward the country’s leaders, or public servants in general, would be meant to serve a death sentence?
How do we reconcile this? If your thought is as good as mine, then you will agree with me that the bill in question was simply controversial, hence doesn’t merit a second hearing let alone passing it. We appreciate that it was eventually stepped down by the lawmakers.
Time has obviously arrived for Nigeria’s political leaders to start placing priorities in all their doings concerning governance. It’s not anymore news that their continuous misplacement of ‘scale of preference’ virtually in their everyday activity remains one of the basic reasons they often move aback when expected to drive ahead.
The collective yearnings of the people shouldn’t be shortchanged for their individual interests. Hence, the quest of the people who constitute the majority in the country shouldn’t be swept under the carpet.
I’m also using this medium to urge Nigerians as a people to be much focused whenever they are seeking governance. They ought not to allow their personal hatred for a certain public servant to override their collective quest for good leadership.
It’s more disturbing when realized that even the leaders seemingly don’t like themselves, thus on a daily basis, display speeches that bear hatred in the name of acting in opposition.
As much as I’m in support of the NASS’ dogged move to eradicate the so-called hate speech among Nigerians, it’s also worth noting that such a movement isn’t meant to erode the fundamental rights of the people.