The Nigeria's upper legislative chamber may have approved a bill enabling security agencies to intercept communications deemed harmful to national security, despite opposition from civil and human rights groups.
Tagged 'Lawful Interception Bill', the bill passed the second reading at the Senate and has been referred to the committees on Communications, Judiciary and National Security for further input.
The Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, endorsed the bill despite the controversy surrounding it.
Once passed into law, the bill will allow security agencies to monitor communications such as telephone calls, e-mail messages, text messages and multimedia applications.
Lawmakers say it could enhance national security, prevent crime and facilitate criminal investigations.
In addition, the bill seeks to prohibit the manufacture, assembly, processing, sales, purchase and advertisement of certain equipment illegally used as interception devices.
Senators said the bill is designed to protect users' interest through prohibition of interception, and provide circumstances under which interception may be permitted for public interest.
However, another senator, Atai Aidoki Ali, opposed the proposed legislation, saying it could give rise to the government going on a witch-hunt of the opposition without court orders. He described the bill as ambiguous, positing that it should be streamlined.
Meanwhile, Business Courage learnt that the law, if and when passed, will empower security agencies to work in concert with the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) and operators of electronic communications services to intercept any communications which are allowed by court pronouncement to be intercepted even if only for investigation purposes.
But to some experts, its interpretation seems to have been eased by referring to it as 'lawful' interception of communication signals but that, according to some industry analysts, was yet to be as it appears it is being confused with infringement on the right of citizens to free communication.
According to Cyberschuul- News, "More confusing is the interpretation of the ongoing legislative discussion as an endorsement of a surveillance agenda of the national security adviser which the House of Representatives had earlier frowned at for reasons of its potential infringement on the rights of citizens, the irregular process by which a purported contract was awarded and other reasons which include the fact that the agenda is ill conceived and unrespectable."
