The ECOWAS Court of Justice has ordered the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) to amend Section 24 of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Act of 2015. DAILY POST report.

According to DAILY POST, the court said the modification would meet obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Information Guide Nigeria

See Other Top News:

• SERAP Requests INEC To Publish Mechanisms To Protect Privacy, Security Of Election Data
• PDP Get Slammed Over Emefiele
• I’m The Best Person To Run Power From The APC In 2023 Election- Wike
• “Pay Us Compensation For Our Demolished Houses“ – Osun Protest

The case was filed by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), a non-governmental organization.

SERAP had challenged the legality and compatibility of the Section in relation to the guarantees enshrined in Article 9 of the ACHPR and Article 19 of the ICCPR.

The body maintained that it violated the rights to freedom of expression, information and other rights of human rights defenders, activists, bloggers, journalists, broadcasters and social media users.

SERAP said since Act was passed, the Nigerian government and its agents have used the provisions to harass, intimidate, arbitrarily arrest and detain and unfairly prosecute the above listed. jamb results

The applicant listed twelve high-profile cases of harassment, intimidation, arrest unlawful detention, prosecution and imprisonment by federal authorities and several states of Nigeria between August 2015 and November 2018.

Responding, the FGN urged the Court to dismiss the suit on the grounds that it was misplaced and unproven and the reliefs sought were not grantable in law.

Its lawyers contended that the application was not only pending before the national court for the same reliefs, but that the interpretation of Section 24 of the Act must be submitted to domestic courts and not the ECOWAS Court.

The FGN said the Act was not only in line with Section 45 of Nigeria’s Constitution, but was subjected to the requisite constitutional and legal processes before its passage.

The Federal Government told the court that SERAP was well aware of the processes but never protest its passage.