Amnesty International must stop defending dangerous falsehoods in the name of free speech

By: Zagazola Makama

Once again, Amnesty International has taken a predictable but deeply troubling stance, this time, condemning the lawful detention of a social media influencer, Ghali Isma’il, who is facing charges over a false and provocative video announcing the death of Nigeria’s sitting President. In its hasty and one-sided statement, Amnesty labeled the Department of State Services’ (DSS) action as “a clear demonstration of abuse of power.” This knee-jerk condemnation reeks not only of bias but of a dangerous disregard for the responsibility that comes with free speech.

It’s important to remember that the Nigerian authorities are acting within the bounds of the law. Ghali Isma’il appeared before a competent magistrate and is being tried for spreading false information an issue of concern to public safety and stability. The viral video claiming the President’s death by poisoning, however unfounded and provocative, point to the need for responsible speech, especially in a period when misinformation can quickly escalate tensions or cause panic.

Let’s be clear: no one is above the law. Isma’il was not whisked away to a secret cell. He was arraigned before a competent magistrate court in Abuja and is being tried according to the laws of the land. The charges spreading false information with intent to cause public alarm and inciting disaffection against the government are not political fabrications.

They are legitimate concerns, especially when tied to a video falsely claiming that President Bola Tinubu had died after being poisoned, and presented with an air of certainty that could spark panic in a country already battling complex security and economic challenges.

If this is what Amnesty International classifies as “freedom of expression,” then the organization must clarify where it draws the line between speech and sabotage. Are we now to accept that individuals can publish death hoaxes about national leaders and peddle wild, fabricated conspiracy theories under the guise of digital activism? Would Amnesty extend this same compassion if the target were a leader in Europe or America?

Is it truly free speech when falsehoods threaten public order or incite unrest? Would Amnesty International hold the same stance if similar misinformation targeted leaders in other parts of the world? These are complex issues with no easy answers, but it is crucial that we weigh the right to expression against the potential harm caused by reckless or deliberately false content.

Let us also not forget that this is not Ghali Isma’il’s first brush with dangerous disinformation. He has repeatedly posted bizarre claims including that former U.S. President Donald Trump was compelling Nigeria to repatriate terrorists into the country and quoting the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Yusuf Tugger, who never mentioned such in his interview. Yusuf said they are ex- convict from Venezuela but Ismail, said they are “Terrorists” . When does free speech become reckless speech? When does falsehood become a threat to national peace and cohesion? This calls for a measured discussion on when speech crosses into dangerous territory especially when it influences public perception and stability.

Moreover, one must ask: where was Amnesty International when ISWAP terrorists released gruesome videos of mass executions? Where was Amnesty when bandits kidnapped and murdered citizens or when IPOB loyalists torched police stations and killed security personnel? The silence or muted response from Amnesty International in those cases raises questions about consistency and priorities. Their silence in the face of these atrocities is deafening. Yet, whenever the Nigerian state acts to preserve order and prevent chaos, Amnesty rushes in with a press release always siding with the provocateur.

Ultimately, the right to free speech must be exercised responsibly. Supporting lawful limits when speech could threaten national peace isn’t a contradiction to human rights but a recognition of their importance in a complex society.

Amnesty International faces an important question: will it stand as a defender of genuine human rights and democratic stability, or does it risk becoming a platform that inadvertently enables disinformation that jeopardizes it?

This double standard is becoming increasingly apparent to Nigerians. The right to free speech must be protected, yes but it must also be exercised with responsibility. Defending lies that threaten national unity under the cloak of human rights advocacy is not activism; it is sabotage.

Amnesty International must decide: is it here to protect Nigeria’s democracy or to shield those who exploit social media to endanger it?

Zagazola Makama is a Counter Insurgency Expert and Security Analyst in the Lake Chad Region

Amnesty International must stop defending dangerous falsehoods in the name of free speech

Abuja property mogul raises alarm over FCTA’s MoU with developers

By: Michael Mike

Managing Director, Abuja Technology Village Free Zone Company Limited, Yohana Dyelkop has raised an alarm over a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) purportedly signed by the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) and some property developers.

The businessman, who expressed this concern at a news conference on Saturday in Abuja, said he was worried by media reports about the said land development MoU.

He said media reports recently indicated that the Ministry of the Federal Capital Territory had sealed an agreement with some local and foreign investors to develop 200 hectares of land in the Abuja Technology Village.

According to him, the reports specifically allege that the MoU has purportedly been signed between FCTA and two organisations, Mag International Links Limited and the National Agency for Science and Technology (NASENI).

Dyelkop said that government’s genuine efforts to attract foreign investment, especially property developers, was commendable but it was expedient to clarify that Abuja Technology Village has numerous plots across various districts.

He warned that his properties: Plots 22 and 23, C17 Industrial Area 2, Pyakasa Village, Airport Road, are located within the area earmarked for the allocation.

“Unless the MoU explicitly excludes these plots, any agreement covering them would be unlawful,” he stressed.

Dyelkop warned that the prospective developers should steer clear of his land as they are subjects of ongoing litigation, adding that cases of land grabbing and encroachment were rampant in the FCT.

According to him, his company has officially written to the parties involved expressing its concern about the MoU, warning them and the prospective investors to steer clear of his properties and avoid possible contempt of court.

“We are concerned about news reports regarding an MoU between the entities and the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) for the purpose of land development.

“Specifically, Plots 22 and 23, C17 Industrial Area 2, Pyakasa Village, Airport Road, are subject to ongoing litigation, with the Hon. Minister as a defendant.

“All parties have been served with a court order, and unless the MoU explicitly excludes these plots, any agreement covering them would be unlawful,” he added.

The real estate mogul, who is also the National Chairman of a political group, “Better Opportunities With Tinubu (BOWT) 2027, called for caution and respect for the rule of law to avoid denting President Bola Tinubu’s image.

Abuja property mogul raises alarm over FCTA’s MoU with developers

Troops repel Boko Haram attack in Gwoza, recover arms and equipment

By: Zagazola Makama

Troops of the Joint Task Force (North East) Operation Hadin Kai have repelled a midnight attack by Boko Haram/ISWAP terrorists on a military position at Limankara, along the Gwoza road in Borno State.

Zagazola Makama report that the attack occurred at about 12:10 a.m. on Friday, July 25, when an unconfirmed number of insurgents attempted to infiltrate the Alpha Company location of 28 Task Force Brigade.

Sources told Zagazola that the troops swiftly engaged the terrorists in a firefight, forcing them to retreat in disarray after sustaining casualties.

During the encounter, one soldier was killed in action while another sustained injuries. The wounded personnel has been evacuated to the 23 Brigade Medical Centre for treatment, while the remains of the deceased have been duly recovered.

Items recovered from the fleeing terrorists include two Baofeng radios, one rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) charger, four empty magazines, and one loaded AK-47 magazine.

Although the number of terrorists killed or wounded could not be immediately confirmed, the military said pursuit operations were ongoing, with troops maintaining dominance of the general area.

“The general security situation in the area remains calm but unpredictable. Maximum vigilance and alertness are being maintained,”said the sources.

Troops repel Boko Haram attack in Gwoza, recover arms and equipment