Amnesty International Nigeria and the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project have called for the release of Foundation for Investigative Journalism reporter Daniel Ojukwu. A Federal High Court in Abuja ordered that he remain at the Kuje Custodial Centre until 1 December. He pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of cyberstalking and criminal defamation. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik declined his lawyer’s request to allow him to remain on administrative bail. She said the bail application was not ripe for hearing.
The charges relate to reports published between November 2023 and January 2024. The reports examined payments by the Office of the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Sustainable Development Goals. One report questioned a ₦147.1 million payment to a restaurant for classroom construction in Lagos. Another examined a ₦47.5 million contract awarded to Tru3 Nigeria Limited. Other reports looked at failing solar panels and the EFCC’s forfeiture of ₦241 million linked to the office. The police also charged FIJ founder Fisayo Soyombo. The prosecution said Soyombo was at large and requested a bench warrant. The judge declined because he had not been brought before her.
Amnesty said the prosecution formed part of a pattern of using the criminal justice system to punish journalists. SERAP urged President Tinubu and Attorney-General Lateef Fagbemi to secure Ojukwu’s release and stop using criminal defamation and cyberstalking charges against journalists. The historical echo is the 2015 Cybercrimes Act, which Nigerian governments have used against bloggers and reporters. The law was meant to tackle online fraud. It has become a tool for silencing scrutiny. The winners are prosecutors and officials who avoid answering the reports. The losers are Ojukwu, Soyombo, FIJ and the public’s right to know how public money is spent.
Winners: Prosecutors, officials who avoid scrutiny, the police.
Losers: Daniel Ojukwu, Fisayo Soyombo, FIJ, press freedom, taxpayers who need independent reporting on public spending.
Bottom Line: The proper response to a story about a ₦147.1 million classroom contract is a public explanation, not a remand warrant. Nigeria’s prosecutors should investigate the allegation, not the journalist.