Stop Blackmail, Misinformation Against Ex-NNPCL EVP Tombomieye, N’ Delta Group Warns

The proliferation of digital platforms has amplified the risks of blackmail and misinformation, necessitating a robust legal response. In Nigeria, individuals targeted by such malicious acts, like the former NNPCL EVP, are afforded protection under a multi-layered legal framework. This framework encompasses both civil and criminal defamation laws, primarily rooted in common law principles and codified in statutes such as the Criminal Code Act and the Penal Code Act. Crucially, the Cybercrime Act, 2015, addresses online manifestations of these harms, providing avenues for redress against cyberstalking, the dissemination of false information, and digital blackmail. This article explores these legal provisions, their application, and the remedies available to practitioners navigating the complex landscape of reputation management in the digital age.

The recent warning by the Niger Delta Movement for Peoples Right and Development (NDMPRAD) against alleged blackmail and misinformation targeting a former Executive Vice President of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) underscores a growing concern in Nigeria's public and corporate spheres. In an era dominated by digital communication, individuals and entities are increasingly vulnerable to reputational attacks disseminated rapidly and widely across online platforms. Such incidents highlight the critical need for a clear understanding of the legal mechanisms available to combat false narratives and malicious campaigns.

Nigeria's legal framework for protecting reputation and addressing malicious publications is derived from a combination of constitutional provisions, common law principles, and statutory enactments. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) guarantees freedom of expression under Section 39, but this right is not absolute and is subject to laws relating to libel, slander, or injurious falsehood. Traditionally, defamation is a civil wrong (tort) categorized into libel (defamatory statements in permanent form, such as writing or online posts) and slander (defamatory statements in transient form, like spoken words). For a civil defamation claim to succeed, the claimant must prove that the words were defamatory, referred to the claimant, and were published to a third party. Beyond civil remedies, defamation also carries criminal implications under the Criminal Code Act (applicable in Southern Nigeria) and the Penal Code Act (applicable in Northern Nigeria). Section 373 of the Criminal Code Act defines defamatory matter as anything likely to injure a person's reputation by exposing them to hatred, contempt, or ridicule, or damaging them in their profession or trade. Section 375 of the Criminal Code Act prescribes imprisonment for publishing defamatory matter, with a higher penalty if the matter is known to be false. Similarly, Sections 391 to 395 of the Penal Code Act address defamation and its punishment. The advent of the internet necessitated a modern legislative response, leading to the enactment of the Cybercrime Act, 2015, which specifically addresses online offenses, including those related to misinformation and blackmail.

The Cybercrime Act, 2015, has become a pivotal instrument in combating online misinformation and blackmail. Section 24 of the Act, particularly subsection (1)(b), criminalizes knowingly or intentionally sending a message via computer systems or networks that is false, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will, or needless anxiety to another. This provision carries a penalty of up to three years imprisonment or a fine of up to N7,000,000.00, or both. While intended to curb cyberbullying and malicious communication, Section 24 has faced criticism for its broad and vague language, which some argue could be misused to stifle freedom of expression and dissent. Indeed, the ECOWAS Court of Justice has ruled that Section 24 of the 2015 Act violates the right to freedom of expression under regional and international human rights law, ordering Nigeria to amend it. Recent amendments in 2024 have attempted to refine the scope, focusing on false messages causing a breakdown of law and order or posing a threat to life.

Beyond general false information, the Cybercrime Act also addresses specific forms of digital blackmail. Section 24(2)(c) targets individuals who knowingly or intentionally transmit communications through a computer system or network containing any threat to harm the property or reputation of the addressee or another, or to accuse them of a crime, to extort money or other value. This complements Section 408 of the Criminal Code Act, which punishes threatening to extort money with imprisonment for up to fourteen years. The Act also covers cyberstalking (Section 24) and the distribution of false information with intent to cause harm (Section 15). The ease of online publication means that individuals who share false or defamatory statements may be held liable in the same way as traditional media houses, with the simplicity of pressing “send” or “post” not absolving responsibility.

For a civil defamation claim, the claimant must establish that the false statement was published to a third party and caused damage to their reputation. Remedies typically include compensatory damages, injunctions to prevent further publication, and orders for public apologies. The challenge in online defamation cases often lies in establishing jurisdiction, given the borderless nature of the internet. However, Nigerian courts have indicated that jurisdiction can be established where the defamatory content was accessed and the claimant's reputation suffered harm within the relevant state. The interplay between freedom of expression and the protection of reputation remains a delicate balance, with courts striving to ensure that while speech is free, it is not exercised irresponsibly to the detriment of others.

The legal landscape in Nigeria offers significant protections against blackmail and misinformation, both through traditional defamation laws and the more contemporary Cybercrime Act, 2015. Practitioners advising clients targeted by such acts must consider both civil and criminal avenues for redress. Swift action, including the issuance of cease and desist letters and the gathering of digital evidence, is paramount given the rapid dissemination of online content. While the Cybercrime Act provides a powerful tool, its application continues to evolve, particularly concerning the balance with fundamental rights to freedom of expression. Attorneys should remain abreast of judicial interpretations and legislative amendments, especially regarding Section 24, to effectively navigate this dynamic area of law. Protecting a client's reputation in the digital age requires a proactive and informed legal strategy, leveraging all available legal instruments to counter malicious campaigns and ensure accountability.