Amnesty International Lambasts Tinubu Government For Shrinking Civic Space, Cites Sowore, SERAP Cases | Sahara Reporters

The organisation said national security powers should not be used to suppress peaceful political expression, arguing that restrictions must be lawful, necessary and proportionate and based on a specific and demonstrable threat.

The Amnesty Internationak Nigeria has accused the administration of President Bola Tinubu of presiding over an increasingly restrictive political and legal environment, alleging that state institutions are being used to intimidate critics, activists, journalists and civil society organisations.

Amnesty International said the situation was reminiscent of the human rights challenges under late former President Muhammadu Buhari, arguing that the Tinubu administration was making “an utter mockery of Nigeria’s constitutional and international obligations to respect human rights and uphold the rule of law.”

The organisation said it was troubling that the Department of State Services (DSS), an agency created to protect the state and citizens, was increasingly involved in court cases seeking to restrain citizens from speaking, organising and criticising those in power.

“There is something deeply troubling about a country in which the security agency created to protect the state and its people increasingly finds itself in court seeking to restrain citizens from speaking, organising and criticising those in power,” the AI said.

According to the organisation, restrictions on civic space can take the form of “arbitrary arrest and detention, unlawful surveillance, unfair criminal prosecutions, baseless defamation lawsuits and strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) designed to make dissent costly and dangerous.”

The Amnesty International cited recent cases involving the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), Prof Pat Utomi and presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore.

SERAP, established in 2004, has used advocacy and public-interest litigation under successive administrations to challenge alleged abuses of power and demand accountability.

AI noted that SERAP successfully challenged the Buhari administration over the suspension of Twitter, with the ECOWAS Court of Justice ruling in 2022 that the suspension violated rights to freedom of expression, access to information and media freedom.

SERAP and the Nigerian Guild of Editors also secured an interim injunction in 2026 restraining the National Broadcasting Commission from enforcing some provisions of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code.

The organisation has also secured court victories involving a journalist, Agba Jalingo, and cases concerning recovered Abacha loot and the Niger Delta Development Commission forensic audit report.

“These cases show what SERAP has consistently done: use the courts to hold governments and public institutions accountable,” it said.

However, Amnesty International said SERAP now faced judicial harassment from the same machinery of state it had sought to hold accountable.

In September 2024, after SERAP called on Tinubu to investigate allegations of corruption and mismanagement involving the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited, DSS officials reportedly visited its Abuja office and demanded to see its directors.

Two officials later sued SERAP for defamation over its public account of the incident. In May 2026, the Federal Capital Territory High Court awarded ₦100 million in damages against SERAP and ordered an apology, costs and post-judgment interest.

SERAP has appealed the judgment and sought a stay of execution, arguing that it contains serious legal and evidential errors.

AI said the case raised “troubling questions about the rule of law, judicial independence and whether civil society organisations can challenge abuses of state power without fear of reprisals.”

He also cited the DSS case involving Professor Pat Utomi, who in 2025 faced legal action over his proposal for a “shadow government”.

The DSS asked the Federal High Court to declare the initiative unconstitutional and restrain Utomi and his associates from pursuing it, while also seeking restrictions on rallies, lectures and media appearances linked to the initiative.

The organisation said national security powers should not be used to suppress peaceful political expression, arguing that restrictions must be lawful, necessary and proportionate and based on a specific and demonstrable threat.

The DSS instituted a cybercrime case against Sowore over social media posts in which he allegedly described Tinubu as a “criminal”.

A Federal High Court later dismissed his no-case submission and held that he had a case to answer.

The organisation asked: “If calling a president a ‘criminal’ on social media becomes a matter for the country’s secret police, where does legitimate political criticism end?”

It argued that public officials should tolerate harsh political criticism and respond through evidence, explanation and political accountability rather than criminal prosecution.

It noted that Tinubu himself, in his 2025 Democracy Day address, said: “No one should bear the brunt of injustice for merely writing a bad report about me or calling me names. Democracy requires a fair degree of tolerance for harsh words and stinging insults. Call me names, call me whatever you will, and I will still call upon democracy to defend your right to do so.”

It also cited Amnesty International’s April 2026 human rights report, which documented arrests and detention of journalists, activists and others expressing dissent, alongside concerns over assaults on journalists, protests and prosecutions under the Cybercrimes Act and criminal defamation laws.

It urged the government to uphold judicial independence, protect civic space and ensure security agencies operate within the law.

“Nigerian authorities must quash the unjust judgment against SERAP, withdraw unjustified charges against Sowore and other journalists and activists, and release anyone detained solely for peacefully exercising their rights,” it said.

It also called on Tinubu to “call the DSS to order”, warning that Nigeria could not afford a situation where peaceful dissent was treated as a security threat.