THE SUSPENSION OF TWITTER IN NIGERIA.

THE SUSPENSION OF TWITTER IN NIGERIA.

Some weeks ago, the Federal Government of Nigeria suspended  the operations of Twitter in Nigeria after a public stand of between the both parties. Let's look at the propriety of the steps taken by both parties.

 Firstly, can any person be arrested for the use of the social platform?

No, nobody can be arrested and charged for by passing the official networks and accessing the social platform through virtual private network (VPN). As such an offence is unknown to Nigerian Law. 

The next question is whether the Nigerian Government acted lawfully by suspending the operations of the social blogging site. First of all, Twitter as an entity is not registered as a foreign Company doing business in Nigeria under the Company and Allied Matters Act, nor does it fall under companies that are qualified to apply for exemption under section 80 of CAMA. Thus, ab initio, by virtue of section 78 of CAMA the activities of Twitter in Nigeria was illegal. 

Secondly, from a diplomatic point of view were they serious grounds to outline a punitive measure against the social blogging site? Let's go back to October last year during the End sars protest, the proprietor of Twitter Mr. Jack Dorsey publicly campaigned and mobilized for funds for the energization of the uprising. This action left many persons bemused. Because, to start with, Mr. Jack is not a Nigerian Citizen, his business is not registered legally in Nigeria, he doesn't maintain an office in Nigeria neither does he by any stretch of the imagination pay his taxes to the Nigerian authorities. Okay, let me try and create a similar example. It's like We chat or Tik Tok Sponsoring the Black Lives Matter or the Capitol invasion, I am not sure the U.S authourities would take that lying low. However, more importantly, the question that continued to resonate in every one's mind was, if it was in the character of Mr. Jack to provide resources in any part of the World where there is injustice? If so, his company ought to have made funds available to the Palestinians when the state of Israel was pounding and pummeling them with missiles, which led to the death of both children and women. Or donate funds to the ouighurs Muslims to help ameliorate their plight in the People's Republic of China. I thought after the whole Libya saga, states and entities would have learnt from interfering in the internal affairs of sovereign Nations. Thus, it beats me hollow why an entity who is not by chance connected to Nigeria would be seriously invested in an uprising. For me, this was a diplomatic faux pas which if it had led to a civil strife would have totally destroyed the Companies International image and in fact it would be those who invited them to provide resources would be the ones jumping from Saudi Arabia to New York to Dubai bemoaning interference of foreign powers forgetting when they invited them. We can see that in Libya, it was those who invited NATO, are the ones who have developed amnesia and are blaming the western bloc for their woes.

Another silent diplomatic upheaval both Twitter  and Nigeria underwent in recent times was the localization of the African Headquarters of the Social blogging site in Ghana. Even though, it was evident that the office was located to take advantage of the huge Nigerian market. But in declaring its reason for locating its Headquarters in Ghana, it did mention that it took the decision in light of the impressive human rights record in Ghana. For every observer, it was evident that this was directed at the Nigerian Government, and there was no doubt that the Nigerian Government would take it as a subtle punch below the belt. I am sure the Nigerian Government at this point would have loved to take a similar decision taken by President Trump when he promised to suspend or even raise tariffs on Toyota products when the Company decided to locate a manufacturing plant in Mexico with the aim of targeting the American market. I am sure what must have tied the hands of the Nigerian Government at this time was a possible retaliation by the Ghanian Government who would have considered this as an act of Economic aggression, considering the fact that there was already diplomatic tension after Nigeria decided to close her borders. Furthermore, I am sure the Nigerian Government stayed its hands when it considered that it would be at a greater loss if there was to be an economic showdown between the both countries, having in mind that Nigeria has more companies doing business in Ghana. Thus, it would have been fool hardy getting into a diplomatic brawl with its neighbors. However, the action by Twitter deeply offended the Government and might have considered it as an act to demarket the country. This was another area they didn't need the unnecessary back and forth, they could have just silently set up their offices and announced their arrival in Africa without trying to throw any unprofitable jab. In this regard, they showed unpardonable diplomatic immaturity.

Thirdly, and the final straw that broke the Camel's back was the deletion of the inglorious statement made by Mr. Muhammadu Buhari on the civil war. This action immediately drew the ire of the Government. From a diplomatic point of view, I think the company could have found a better way to have resolved the whole situation. Probably by going through back channels and asking the Federal Government of Nigeria to clarify any ambiguity in the statement posted on its site to ensure reference was not being made to the genocide that took place in the civil war. By deleting the tweet, it had the following consequences : (i) It did create the sentiment of censoring the president of a Sovereign Country (ii) It concluded the fact that the President was promising genocide against a Component part of the Country and not threatening secessionists in the Country. 

Finally, I am not convinced that these whole stand-off is beneficial for both parties. Twitter on the one hand is bleeding billions of Naira as a result of the suspension together with a growing notorious International image, while  Nigeria  on the other hand is suffering a huge unemployment palava pegged at about 33.3%. The ban on this blogging site would further deteriorate the unemployment problem as many young people rely on this platform to earn their daily wage. Also, there is also the worry of the image of the Nigerian Government been tainted as unreceptive to free speech, as well as, creating an Unfavorable environment for FDI's. Personally, as for the latter, this face off should not create uncertainty in the minds of FDI's unless they are not fully seized with the facts, or they are coming to invest in the media space. If not, I do not see why a Lafarge should be worried about the treatment of Twitter in Nigeria when they know that they would never interfere in the internal Politics of Nigeria. However, as I said before, there are those who might entertain the idea of setting up a media outfit in Nigeria. These class of people have genuine reasons to be apprehensive. Thus, it has continuously been my wish that both parties sit down and strategize a mutually beneficial arrangement. I imagine when this conversation commences, it would be centred around taxation, regulation as well as mutual respect.