The bugging bill

If the bill becomes law, authorities will have the power to obtain and present such material as evidence in any prosecution of suspects in court. The security agents will also be empowered to request communication companies to conduct surveillance on individuals, and hand over the data to the authorities. For the purpose of providing safeguards […]

If the bill becomes law, authorities will have the power to obtain and present such material as evidence in any prosecution of suspects in court. The security agents will also be empowered to request communication companies to conduct surveillance on individuals, and hand over the data to the authorities. For the purpose of providing safeguards against possible abuse by security agents, a warrant issued by a judge would be required before security agents can intercept such messages, except in the instances of ”verifiable” urgency, in which case the request would be formalised at a later date.
Even before its consideration by the legislature, the proposal has attracted widespread criticisms. Privacy issues and a possible abridgement of some constitutionally guaranteed rights of Nigerians are areas of major concern.  Arguments have also been canvassed that it if the legislation contained strong enough safeguards, it could be a positive development.
The involvement of many Nigerians in cybercrime in many parts of the world has taken a worrying dimension. In its wider context, the activities of Nigerian cybercriminals have imposed a heavy toll on the image of the nation in the eyes of the international community. Hardly a day passes without one story or the other of a Nigerian, acting alone or in concert with others, to defraud others. In recent years, the anonymity provided by the cyber-world has been exploited by perpetrators of serious crimes like kidnapping, armed robbery and general acts of terrorism.
In considering the bill, the National Assembly should identify and examine its wider implications for citizens’ privacy and delete any provisions that appear to limit it. The possibility of rogue security operatives using the law to blackmail and intimidate otherwise innocent citizens should be taken into account and addressed.  If many Nigerians are uneasy with the bill, it is for good reason, given the unprofessional conduct of officers of most of the nation’s security agencies.  
With the present state of affairs in the polity as a backdrop, there is the possibility that the significance of the positive aspects of the bill may be lost to partisan squabbles. That is possible only if the government does not do the right thing by adequate sensitization of the public on the merits of the bill. In this context, the government should be proactive to make the citizenry adopt the vision behind the initiative, provided they can be convinced that the law would not be used indiscriminately and for purely political reasons.  
The concern remains equally for the technological capacity of the security agents to domesticate the operations locally, even if it is in the interest of national security.
As the backlash to government snooping on citizens has shown in the whistleblower Edward Snowden’s case in the United States, the government must tread carefully in what officials do with any data they mined regarding private communication. The National Assembly also has a duty to ensure that whatever provisions of  the bill survive the various stages of its reading,  these must capture the sensitivities of the people even as government is not hamstrung in its legitimate duty of protection of the citizens and safeguarding their personal liberties.
Nigerians have a long history of fighting successive governments – colonial and indigenous –to protect civil liberties, especially personal freedoms. This initiative should not be allowed to degenerate into another call to arms against any perceived threat to their personal freedoms, real or imagined.