The legal framework
The framework rests on the Cybercrimes Act 2015, amended in 2024, which covers cyberstalking and online harassment, alongside criminal and civil defamation. The amendment narrowed the much-criticised offence of transmitting false information, after sustained litigation and regional court rulings.
Key points
| Defamation | Civil in all of these jurisdictions; criminal defamation retained in some |
|---|---|
| Cyberharassment | Criminalised by cybercrime legislation |
| Intimate images | Non-consensual distribution is an offence |
| Platform removal | Usually faster than any legal route; use it first |
| Risk to speakers | Cybercrime provisions have been used against journalists and critics in several of these countries |
| Evidence | Screenshots with URL and date are the foundation of any complaint |
| Cyberstalking provision | Section 24 of the Cybercrimes Act, narrowed by the 2024 amendment |
| Civil defamation | Available, with substantial awards in some cases |
| Criminal defamation | Exists in the criminal and penal codes |
| ECOWAS Court | Has ruled against the use of these provisions to silence journalists |
In practice
- Capture evidence first: full screenshots with URL, date and surrounding context, before anything is deleted.
- Report to the platform and keep the reference number and the outcome.
- Then use the legal route — the order matters, because platforms act faster than courts.
- Do not respond in kind: your own posts become evidence too.
- Frame a complaint around the specific harm suffered rather than general offence.
- Consider civil proceedings where reputation rather than safety is the issue.
Cost and coverage
Police complaints are free; civil defamation actions are expensive.
Recent changes
Regional courts — including the ECOWAS Court and the African Court — have pressed for the decriminalisation of defamation, and several countries in the region have moved in that direction.
Where to go
- Nigeria Police cybercrime units and the NPF complaint response unit.
- National Human Rights Commission.
- Media Rights Agenda and other free expression organisations.
Worth knowing
Two habits protect you in these jurisdictions: document what you receive, and think twice about what you post. Cybercrime provisions are used in both directions, and an angry reply can turn a complainant into a defendant. Regional courts have repeatedly found the cyberstalking provision incompatible with free expression. The 2024 amendment narrowed it in response.
Official sources and links
- Nigeria.gov.ng — official government portal