Tinubu administration using legal system to suppress dissent — Amnesty lawyer - Vanguard News
The administration of President Bola Tinubu is presiding over an increasingly restrictive political and legal environment in Nigeria, according to Kolawole Olaniyan, legal adviser at Amnesty International’s International Secretariat.
Olaniyan made the assertion in an opinion article in which he examined what he described as growing concerns over freedom of expression, civic space and the use of legal and security institutions against critics of government.
He argued that the situation under Tinubu was being characterised by what he described as threats, harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders, activists, journalists and civil society organisations.
According to him, recent cases involving the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, Professor Pat Utomi and activist and journalist Omoyele Sowore raised questions about the treatment of dissent in the country.
Olaniyan said restrictions on civic space could take forms including arrest and detention, surveillance, criminal prosecution, defamation lawsuits and strategic lawsuits against public participation, known as SLAPPs.
He cited Amnesty International’s 2026 assessment of human rights developments in Nigeria, which, he said, documented arrests and detention of journalists, activists and others expressing dissent, as well as assaults on journalists during protests.
On the SERAP case, Olaniyan noted that the organisation had challenged successive governments through advocacy and public-interest litigation.
He said SERAP had secured court victories over issues including freedom of expression and access to information, but was now facing what he described as judicial harassment.
Olaniyan also examined the role of National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, noting that SERAP had previously supported him during controversies surrounding his removal as chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC.
He argued that the organisation’s current experience raised questions about the treatment of civil society groups that challenge government institutions.
On the case involving Professor Pat Utomi, Olaniyan said the Department of State Services, DSS, had approached the court over Utomi’s proposal for a “shadow government”, seeking orders concerning the initiative and activities associated with it.
He acknowledged that the state had legitimate powers to investigate genuine national security threats but argued that national security should not be used as a basis for restricting peaceful political expression.
Olaniyan also referred to the case involving Sowore, who faced charges arising from social media posts concerning President Tinubu.
He questioned where legitimate political criticism should end if harsh political speech increasingly becomes the subject of criminal proceedings.
The Amnesty lawyer further criticised what he described as a contradiction between the administration’s stated commitment to freedom of expression and its handling of critics.
He cited Tinubu’s 2025 Democracy Day remarks in which the President said Nigerians should be able to criticise and even insult him without facing injustice.
Olaniyan argued that such statements should be matched by government action, including respect for judicial independence, human rights and freedom of expression.
He called for stronger protection against SLAPPs and urged Nigerian authorities to review cases involving journalists, activists and civil society organisations.
Olaniyan concluded that the protection of civic space required government institutions to operate within the law while allowing citizens, journalists and civil society groups to scrutinise public officials and policies.
Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of Vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.
