Federal High Court: Daniel Ojukwu Remanded for Cyberstalking in Nigeria

• Investigative journalist Daniel Ojukwu has been remanded to Kuje Correctional Centre in Abuja on charges of cyberstalking and criminal defamation.
• The charges stem from reports published by Ojukwu and FIJ founder Fisayo Soyombo, questioning public spending by the Office of the Senior Special Assistant to the President on SDGs.
• Adejoke Orelope-Adefulire, former SSA on SDGs, is the complainant in the case.
• Ojukwu pleaded not guilty to 12 counts, and his bail application is scheduled for December 1.
• Seventeen media and civil society organizations have condemned the remand, calling for Ojukwu's release and an end to the criminalization of investigative journalism in Nigeria.

The renewed prosecution, according to these groups, risks fostering a climate of fear among investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and civil society organizations dedicated to exposing corruption and misuse of public resources.

Investigative journalist Daniel Ojukwu has been ordered to remain in custody at the Kuje Correctional Centre in Abuja following a Federal High Court ruling. The court's decision, issued on Tuesday, mandates his detention until December 1, the date set for the hearing of his bail application. Mr. Ojukwu, who is being prosecuted alongside Fisayo Soyombo, the founder of the Foundation for Investigative Journalism (FIJ), entered a plea of not guilty to all twelve counts brought against him.

The charges against Mr. Ojukwu stem from reports published between November 2023 and January 2024. These reports focused on the operations of the Office of the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Sustainable Development Goals (OSSAP-SDGs). Police authorities have accused both journalists of cyberstalking and criminal defamation, specifically naming Adejoke Orelope-Adefulire, who previously served as the senior special assistant on SDGs under the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, as the complainant.

During the court proceedings, Mr. Ojukwu's legal representative, Atanda Kayode, requested that his client be permitted to continue under the administrative bail previously granted by the police, asserting that all conditions had been met. However, the presiding judge, Joyce Abdulmalik, declined to consider the pending bail application, stating that it was not yet "ripe" for review, having only been filed on Monday. The prosecution also informed the court that Mr. Soyombo was currently at large and sought a bench warrant for his apprehension, a request that Judge Abdulmalik denied on the grounds that Mr. Soyombo had not yet appeared before the court.

The core of the prosecution's case revolves around investigative reports that raised significant questions regarding public expenditure. These reports highlighted specific financial transactions, including an alleged N147.1 million allocated for classroom construction projects and an additional N47.5 million for a separate contract. Further findings by FIJ, as cited in the reports, indicated that solar installations associated with these projects ceased to function shortly after their completion.

These journalistic inquiries into the spending of public funds form the basis of the cyberstalking and criminal defamation charges. The case underscores a growing concern among media organizations regarding the application of Nigerian cybercrime law against journalists who scrutinize government activities. The allegations suggest that the reporting, which aimed to hold public officials accountable for the use of taxpayer money, crossed into legally actionable territory according to the authorities.

The remand of Daniel Ojukwu has drawn widespread condemnation from 17 media and civil society organizations, including prominent groups like the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), BudgIT, Media Rights Agenda, and the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development (CJID). In a joint statement released on Wednesday, these organizations vehemently demanded Mr. Ojukwu's immediate release and called for an end to what they described as the criminalization of legitimate investigative journalism. They warned that prosecuting journalists over reports examining public expenditure could severely undermine press freedom in Nigeria and discourage vital accountability reporting.

The organizations characterized Mr. Ojukwu's ongoing detention as an attempt to suppress legitimate investigative reporting and urged authorities to cease the perceived misuse of cybercrime and criminal defamation laws against journalists. They emphasized that public officials entrusted with resources must be prepared to transparently account for their expenditures, asserting that criminal prosecution should not serve as a shield for public institutions against scrutiny. This current legal action follows Mr. Ojukwu's previous arrest and ten-day detention in May 2024 for the same reporting, from which he was released on May 10 after significant public outcry and advocacy from human rights groups.

The renewed prosecution, according to these groups, risks fostering a climate of fear among investigative journalists, whistleblowers, and civil society organizations dedicated to exposing corruption and misuse of public resources. They cited constitutional provisions, specifically Sections 22 and 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which affirm the press's role in holding government accountable and guarantee freedom of expression, alongside protections enshrined in the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They argue that if public officials deem a report inaccurate or defamatory, the appropriate course of action should be civil remedies, not criminal prosecution.

Lawyers advising media organizations and journalists in Nigeria must closely monitor the evolving application of cybercrime and criminal defamation laws, as this case exemplifies the potential for these statutes to be used to suppress investigative reporting on public expenditure. This development necessitates a review of risk mitigation strategies for journalistic activities and robust preparation for defending against such charges, particularly concerning bail procedures and constitutional rights arguments.

Source: Original reporting via Premium Times