Implications of Nigeria’s Twitter Ban and Use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) on Freedom of Speech and Expression

American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research (AJHSSR) 2022
<<<
A J H S S R J o u r n a l P a g e | 1
American Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research (AJHSSR)
e-ISSN :2378-703X
Volume-6, Issue-4, pp-01-13
www.ajhssr.com
Research Paper Open Access
Implications of Nigeria’s Twitter Ban and Use of Virtual
Private Networks (VPNs) on Freedom of Speech and
Expression
Bernard J.C. Anyanwu, PhD.1
, Edikan N. Ukpong2
, Okoro L. Nkechi, PhD.3
1
Associate Professor, Department of Mass Communication, Imo State University, Owerri, Nigeria
2
Postgraduate Student, Department of Mass Communication, Imo State University, Owerri, Nigeria,
3
Department of Mass Communication, Imo State University, Owerri, Nigeria
ABSTRACT: The researchers examined the implications of Nigeria’s Twitter ban, and the use of Virtual
Private Networks on freedom of speech and expression in the country. The researchers found that the
infringement of the rights of Nigerian’s to freedom of speech and expression was a critical concern of the ban of
twitter. Since, participants saw Nigeria’s Twitter ban was a step by the government to absolutely regulate social
media. It established that VPNs were very useful, helpful and instrumental in ensuring that Nigerian’s exercise
their right to freedom of speech and expression. The researchers recommended that Twitter and the Nigerian
government should ensure that they come to a baseline of understanding in order to redress their stands on the
ban of twitter since it affects a large part of the country, and the press most especially.
KEYWORDS: Nigeria‟s Twitter ban, Virtual Private Networks, Freedom of speech, Libertarian theory,
Nigerian government
I. INTRODUCTION
“I am the most abused and insulted president in the world, but when I leave office you will all remember me for
the total freedom you enjoyed under my government,” – Goodluck Jonathan, former president of Nigeria.On
the 14th of December, 2014, the then president of Nigeria, GoodluckEbele Jonathan took to his Facebook
handle explain to Nigerians that the extent of freedom of speech experienced during his tenure might not be
replicated in the subsequent tenures or administrations in the Nigeria. The ex-president acclaimed himself as the
most insulted president of the country. However, in the true spirit of democracy, the ex-president still pushed on
to carry out his delegated duties as the representative of the people. But, just seven years after, Nigerians are
beginning to see the full implementation of measure to deny the citizen of the country the rights and privilege
enshrined in the freedom of information act signed into law during his tenure as president. There is a wide
believe from public opinion that the Nigeria’s twitter ban saga is Buhari led administrations first breakthrough
in its quest to monitor and regulate the social media.
Right from the inception of the Buhari led administration in 2019; President MuhammaduBuhari along
with his cabinethas attempted various ways of gaining control over the social media by regulating it. According
to Asadu (2017), who labelled the administration as military, opined that the decision of the Buhari led
administration to monitor comments on social media "had breached our national red lines was because it
believed that some content created by Nigerians have crossed what the administration called “national red
lines”. According to the president cited by Asadu (2017),Nigerians are robust and energetic in discussing their
problems, on social media but the president expressed dismayed over some of the comments that had crossed
our national red lines by daring to challenge our nation's collective existence. The government followed up with
its desire to set in measures to monitor and regulate social media. In addition, there were numerous attempts
including the proposing of an anti-social media bill, and sanctioning people who are believed by government to
go against what it calls national red lines among other.
The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria introduced the Anti-Social Media Bill on November 5,
2019 to make it illegal to use social media to spread false or malicious information (Vanguard, 2019). The bill's

<<<
original title was the Internet Falsehood and Manipulation Protection Act of 2019. Senator Mohammed Sani
Musa of northern Nigeria, a generally conservative region, sponsored the bill. After the bill passed second
reading (ThisDay, 2019) on the Nigeria Senate floor and its specifics were made public, information surfaced on
social media accusing the bill's sponsor of plagiarising a similar law in Singapore, which ranks last in the world
for freedom of speech and the press. Angry reactions trailed the introduction of the bill, and a number of civil
society organisations, human rights activists, and Nigerian citizens unanimously opposed the bill (The Punch,
2019).
The issues leading to Nigeria’s Twitter ban provided the government of Nigeria with the need scenario
to experiment its desire of regulating and monitoring the activities of her citizens on social media. An African
adage goes, “when two elephants fight, it is the grass that suffers it”. The case between Jack Dorsey (founder of
twitter) and President MuhammaduBuhari (PMB) of Nigeria is a clear illustration of this adage. The social
media tussle between twitter founder and Nigerian president, who can be referred to as the elephants has led to
ban of one of the most prominent social media platforms in the country. This leaves a large number of
Nigerians, their businesses, network in shambles – the grass that suffered. Thanks to the availability of the
virtual private networks(VPNs) that was handy to pull some of the drowning businesses and individuals back to
limelight.The point of concern is the persistent desire of a democratic government to monitor social media.What
is the implication of all these on the essence of democracy with is freedom of speech and expression? It is as a
result of this that this study takes a closer look at the situations surrounding Nigeria’s twitter ban and its
implications on the right of Nigerians to freedom of speech and expression.
The researchers are bugged with the complexities of this situation and seek to ascertain how Nigeria,
first, feel about the fact that Twitter deleted the post of an incumbent presidents. This study is also concern with
the implications of Nigeria’s Twitter ban and the use of Virtual Private Networks on freedom of speech and
expression in country. The aims of this study were to ascertain Nigerian’s perception of twitter’s deleting of
President MuhammaduBuhari’s tweet; determine the group of people mostly affected by Nigeria’s twitter ban in
terms of freedom of speech and expressions; examine Nigerian’s perception on using Virtual Private Network to
access twitter after its ban; evaluate the implications of Nigeria’s twitter ban on freedom of speech and
expression in Nigeria, and, find out the implications of using Virtual Private Network to access twitter on
freedom of speech and expression in Nigeria.
II. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
i. How do Nigerians perceive twitter’s deleting of President MuhammaduBuhari’s tweet in terms of freedom
of speech and expression?
ii. Which group of people in the Nigerian society are mostly affected by Nigeria’s twitter ban in terms of
freedom of speech and expression?
iii. How do Nigerians perceive the use of Virtual Private Network (VPNs) to access twitter after its ban in
terms of freedom of speech and expression? And,
iv. What are the perceived implications of Nigeria’s twitter ban as well as using Virtual Private Network to
access twitter on freedom of speech and expression in Nigeria?
v. What are the perceived implications of using Virtual Private Network to access twitter on freedom of
speech and expression in Nigeria?
III. LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Nigeria‟s Twitter Ban: Cause, Occurrence and Effect
There have been public outcries on the concerns and implications of the ban of twitter on the economy, politics,
business and even religion. In addition to this, there is a greater concern on the implications of the twitter ban on
the right of every Nigerian to freedom of speech and expression. One of the schools of thought on this matter is
of the opinion that the ban on twitter is just the first step by the Nigerian government to absolutely regulate the
social media. The others are of the opinion that the government intends to use the social media platform for
revenue generation. Whatever the case may be, the greater weight rests on the intentions of the government to
control and regulate platforms that are meant to be decentralised and devoid of any form of control, especially in
a democratic government. The first question to tackles is: why the ban?
According to Akinpelu (2021), the Nigerian government suspended the operations of Twitter in Nigeria
indefinitely after the social media platform pulled down a tweet by President MuhammaduBuhari that it deemed
to be encouraging violence. Jalloh agrees that “the judgement to suspend twitter came just days after Nigerian
President MuhammaduBuhari's message was removed from Twitter” (para. 2). The government stated that
Twitter's actions would not be tolerated because they would jeopardise Nigeria's “corporate survival” and

<<<
meddling in the country's internal affairs. According to a statement made by Nigeria's ministry of
communication, the Twitter ban is a first step toward more social media control. This indicates that the
government's long-awaited social media regulatory initiative, which had been widely panned, was finally
started.
Inquiring into the issue, Jalloh (2021) highlights that the main of argument of the government in
defence off its ban on twitter is that, Twitter allows secessionists to disseminate information that undermines the
country's stability while blocking the president's remark. As averred by the minister of information:
We found out that Twitter is the platform of choice for a particular separatist
leader who resides outside the country and issues directives to his members to
attack symbols of government authorities such as the police, military, electoral
commission offices, correctional centres, etc... this is being done wilfully and
consistently, without any consequences from Twitter. No country that wants to
survive would tolerate that and no company, no matter its self-importance,
would force a nation to accept this (Lai Mohammed cited in Jalloh, 2021).
The twitter ban has joined Nigeria to an infamous list of eight countries that have recently banned
Twitter. Without delay, telecommunication firms, according to Akinpelu (2021), had cooperated with the order
following the government's pronouncement of a Twitter ban. Jalloh (2021) is of the opinion that Nigeria's
Twitter shutdown has disconnected millions of Twitter users. While some have applauded the ban, it has
sparked a global outcry over freedom of expression and highlighted the country's north-south division. The
move came after the Nigerian government banned Twitter, a micro-blogging and social networking service.
Nigerian authorities claim that the site was being used to spread falsehoods in order to destabilise the country.
The premise that the government plans to leverage social media for income generating is confirmed by
Jalloh (2021). “Social media businesses intending to operate in Nigeria must register as a local entity and obtain
a licence from the country's information minister, Lai Mohammed,” according to Jalloh. “We are insisting that
for you to operate in Nigeria, you must first be a Nigerian company and be licensed by the broadcasting
commission... twitter has consistently made its platform available to those who are threatening Nigeria's
corporate existence; that is the reason for suspending their operations in Nigeria,” according to the minister
(para. 3).
In addition to this, there are suspicions that the government plans to use this ban on Twitters as the first
successful step towards the regulation of the social media. Alumona (2021) highlights that the ban on Twitter, a
platform that helped the ruling party to victory in the 2015 presidential election, is part of the government’s plan
to regulate social media. In his explanation, Alumona states that:
In 2017, Nigeria’s information minister, Lai Mohammed, blamed the siege of
disinformation and fake news on social media. A National Council on
Information (NCI) was set up soon after and recommended that a council be set
up to regulate the use of social media. In 2019, the information minister
supported an anti-social-media bill titled: Protections from Internet Falsehood
and Manipulations, sponsored by Senator Mohammed Sani Musa of the ruling
APC party. The government also ordered internet services including WhatsApp,
Zoom, Netflix, Skype, to obtain licenses from the National Broadcasting
Commission before operating in the country.
Another aspect of the effect of the twitter ban is explained by MacEbong cited in Alumona (2021).
MacEbong said that the suspension of twitter in Nigeria has the tendencies of deterring investors. Tech
businesses that operate on a global scene with other country that are less hostile than Nigeria will desist from
desirous to establish footholds in Africa are more likely to consider Ghana rather than Nigeria. GbengaSesan,
executive director of the Paradigm Initiative, a pan-African social enterprise focused on digital rights and
inclusion, agrees. He claims that the suspension of Twitter sends the incorrect message to international
investors, and that small businesses in Nigeria that rely on Twitter for income will be impacted. “Digital media
is used by Nigerian businesses to reach out to customers, expose their brands, and engage with other
stakeholders. This impulsive choice will undoubtedly have an impact on that”, Sesan (2021, para. 1) opined.

<<<
The statement by Nigeria's Cultural Minister Lai Mohammed that the ban would be lifted if Twitter
complies with local licensing, registration, and requirements of the country goes a long way to buttress the fact
that the government have made a first stride in its quest to gag the social media. According to him, “it [Twitter]
will be licensed by the broadcasting commission, and it must agree not to allow those who are supporting
actions that are detrimental to Nigeria's business existence to utilise its platform.”
B. Twitter Deleting President Buhari‟s Tweet, Nigeria‟s Twitter ban and the violation of freedom of speech and
expression
First, it is necessary to establish a perimeter for knowing what constitute infringement of one’s right to freedom
of speech. This can only be done by defining what freedom of speech is, and the conditions within which it is
operational. According to Fee (1973), freedom of speechis a principle that supports the freedom of an individual
or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.
The term freedom of expression is usually used synonymously but, in legal sense, includes any activity of
seeking, receiving, and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.The right to freedom of
expression is recognized as a human right under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR).
Article 19 of the UDHR states that "everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without
interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to
seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in
print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice." The version of Article 19 in the ICCPR later
amends this by stating that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may
"therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others"
or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals."
Secondly, do Nigerians have a constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression? There is an
outstanding provision in the constitution of the country establishing the right of its citizens to freedom of speech
and expression. Specifically, the section 39 (1) and (2) of the Federal Republic of Nigeria constitution protects
freedom of expression in Nigeria provides thus:
[Subsection](1) Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression,
including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and
information without interference. [Subsection] (2) Without prejudice to the
generality of subsection (1) of this section, every person shall be entitled to own,
establish and operate any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas
and opinions: Provided that no person, other than the Government of the
Federation or of a State or any other person or body authorised by the President
on the fulfilment of conditions laid down by an Act of the National Assembly,
shall own, establish or operate a television or wireless broadcasting station for,
any purpose whatsoever.
Despite this constitutional safeguard, the Nigerian government has maintained influence over the media
for much of its history, with some instances continuing to this day. Nigeria, on the other hand, would have over
100 independent publications by 2020. Furthermore, between 1979 and 1983, the government of the Second
Nigerian Republic delegated censorship to the military for a brief while. Nigerian censors frequently target
certain types of ideas, such as ethnic debates, political opposition, and moral ambiguity.
On this premises, Jalloh (2021) opines that legal experts in Nigeria said the Twitter ban violates the
freedom of expression guaranteed by the country's constitution. Baba Dala, a constitutional lawyer, cited by
Jalloh is of the view that the new directive by the federal government on ban Twitter was very detrimental to
Nigeria and Nigerians. According to Dala, it is a matter of concern that the decision to suspend Twitter was a
unilateral decision. Dala states that “Nigeria’s Twitter users are assumed to be primarily young southerners who
use the platform to hold their government to account”. This implies that the ban of the social media platform
might have been a deliberate action by the federal government to jettison the efforts and activities of these
young Nigerians. This opinion might be from proponents of the school of thought that Nigerian government
does not want anything good for its teeming aspiring youths. They hold this ban on twitter as a follow up on the
strict regulations against and subsequent ban on crypto-currencies.

<<<
In addition to the assertion that the present government is not youth-friendly, infringing on the right to
the freedom of speech and expression of Nigeria has drawn global attention.
C. Upsurge of the Use of Virtual Private Network in Nigeria
The ban on twitter led to an upsurge in the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) to circumvent and bypass the
restrictions. The ban encouraged Nigerians to use Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to get around the prohibition
(VPN). Attorney-General AbubakarMalami said that after the government became aware of the diversion, it
issued an order that offenders may risk being prosecuted, a warning he failed to back up with legal evidence.
With this, it is nothing to argue that, Mr Buhari’s years as a military ruler who wielded prosecutorial powers
without checks is still evident in this style of democratic leadership. As observed by Jalloh (2021), Nigerian
Twitter users were outraged by the restriction. According to public opinion documented by Jalloh, Africa’s most
populous country was drifting towards dictatorship. In order to stay in touch with their online networks and
connections, many twitters users got around the suspension by accessing the service through virtual private
networks (VPNs).
Alumona (2021) states that twitter users in the country rushed Twitter when it was suspended, using
VPNs to voice their outrage and disappointment. Alumona returned to Lagos and used his VPN to join other
Nigerians in tweeting with the hashtag #KeepitOn. Alumona is terrified, despite utilising a VPN. “The way
things are going, as a Nigerian, I'm terrified because we don't know what's going to happen next,” he stated.
“Our ability to speak up for the truth and hold the government accountable will be harmed.” In his own opinion,
Alaribe (2021) believes that many Nigerians have adopted the use of VPNs (Virtual Private Networks) to get
past the limitation; with the Federal Government's indefinite ban of Twitter after it erased a message by
President MuhammaduBuhari, (Jason, 2021). According to Alaribe, on the internet nowadays, VPN has become
known as a solution to a variety of privacy issues. Also, while telcos and other internet service providers (ISPs)
have restricted access to Twitter as a result of the government ban, a VPN can provide the security solution that
allows you to regain access to the micro-blogging site. It is nothing to argue that the use of VPN to access
twitter came with its own disadvantages and benefits. Nigerian twitter did not consider the disadvantages as they
were out to do anything to have their rights to freedom of speech and expression.
IV. EMPIRICAL REVIEW
The research concern on Nigeria’s Twitter ban is still very new. But, there are abounding materials on the use of
social media such as twitter for or/and against the government and the desire for government in Nigeria to
regulate the social media. One of the studies on the use of social media against the government in Nigeria is the
study conducted Oloyede and Elega (2020) to explore the impact of social media hashtags, like the #EndSars on
awareness creation about police extortion, rape, assault, and extra judicial killings, ultimately leading to the
disbandment of the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS). Nigeria has also witnessed significant improvement in
political participation over the years due to the advent of the social media. Agbaenyi, Okafor and Nwagbo
(2015) attributed the victory of the opposition party (APC) in the 2015 general elections to the use of social
media by political actors for transmitting campaign promises and exposing some ills of the incumbent
government and its party to the people as opposed to the mainstream media that were mostly in controlled by the
incumbent government.
Despite the positives of the social media, there have been several agitations for its regulation not just
by individuals, but also by governments around the world. The 2013 Defamation Acts enacted by the UK
government was prompted by defamation activities by individuals on social media (Chin, 2013). The “dark
side” of social media includes cyber-bullying, manipulation of elections, fear of missing out, social media
addiction and the distribution of fake news, therefore an independent, reliable and universal regulatory
framework that applies equally to all social media companies must be created (Baccarella, Wagner,
Kietzmann& McCarthy, 2019). Also calling for intervention are researchers s O'Keeffe and
ClarkePearson(2011) who disclosed in their 2011 report that pre-teens and teens who spend a great deal of time
on social media sites, such as Facebook, begin to exhibit classic symptoms of depression triggered by the
intensity of the online world, thereby putting them at risk of social isolation which in turn leads them to risky
social media sites for “help” that may promote substance abuse, unsafe sexual practices, aggressive or self-
destructive behaviours. (O'Keeffe & Clarke-Pearson, 2011).
In the same vein, Goodwina, Lemolaa and Ben-Ezrab (2017) call for interventions that target social
media use by citizens of France, particularly amongst those most vulnerable to distress. Findings from their
research indicates a significant impact of media use on traumas and sleep disorders following the 2015 Batlacan
terror attacks in Paris France. They used this premise to advocate for the regulation of the social media.

<<<
V. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
For this study, two perspective of libertarianism were considered; libertarian theory of citizenship and the
libertarian theory of the press. These two theoretical perspectives are from the libertarian movement that sprang
up in the United Kingdom. The Libertarian theory of citizenship explains that individuals' relationships with the
political community have been conceptualised in a variety of ways. The first is the liberal viewpoint, which,
naturally, prioritises the individual. A liberal view of citizenship emphasises each citizen's equality of rights and
how these rights enable the individual to accomplish their goals and objectives (Lister, 2008). According to
Boaz (2020), liberalism seeks to define and justify the legitimate powers of government in terms of certain
natural or God-given individual rights. These rights include the rights to life, liberty, private property, freedom
of speech and association, freedom of worship, government by consent, equality under the law, and moral
autonomy (the ability to pursue one’s own conception of happiness, or the “good life”).
Lister (2008) and Boaz (2020) share the sentiment that the libertarian theory of citizenship holds the
government responsible to protect these and other individual rights, and in general liberals have contended that
government power should be limited to that which is necessary to accomplish this task. Libertarians are classical
liberals who strongly emphasize the individual right to liberty. They contend that the scope and powers of
government should be constrained so as to allow each individual as much freedom of action as is consistent with
a like freedom for everyone else. Thus, they believe that individuals should be free to behave and to dispose of
their property as they see fit, provided that their actions do not infringe on the equal freedom of others.
From the perspective of the press (mass media), the libertarian theory of the press is one of the
“Normative theories of press”. The theory is based on libertarian ideas from the sixteenth century in Europe.
The libertarian philosophers are against the authoritarian beliefs. International trade and urbanisation undermine
the power of a rural aristocracy which leads to the raise f various social movements including the Protestants
reformation, which demands individual’s freedom and their own lives and free thoughts. Information is
knowledge, and knowledge is power, according to liberalism. Libertarianism is devoid of all forms of power,
control, or restriction. Libertarianism is an individualistic and limited-government philosophy that is not
damaging to others. As a result of this, according to libertarian theory, humans are more capable of identifying
and judging good ideas from bad. People are reasonable, according to the theory, and their reasoning thoughts
drive them to discover what is good and wrong.
This theory holds the belief that the press should not be restricted in any way, even if the content is
unfavourable because it can provide information and help people make better decisions in the worst-case
scenario. The libertarian viewpoint is diametrically opposed to the authoritarian idea, which states that “all
media of communication work under the supervision of the government or elite, such as the king”. Coupled with
the perspective on citizenship, the libertarian movement general holds the belief that government should be
accountable to the people and the media should be free enough to ensure that people can send their feedbacks to
the government presenting then. The Nigeria’s Twitter ban tussle between Jack and Buhari presents a very
different scenario from what this theory proposed. Both parties, as a result of this theory’s propositions need to
work in line with the freedom of speech and expression, which is every human’s right.
VI. METHODOLOGY
The researchers used the online survey (or the internet survey) for this study in order to cover a large expanse of
the study’s population. According to QuestionPro Survey Software (2021), online survey is one of the most
popular data-collection sources, where a set of survey quests is sent out to a target sample and the members of
the sample and the members of the sample can respond to the questions over the Internet. This method helped
the researchers to overcome the challenge of distance barrier and reach to a large number of Nigerians.
Accordingly, the population of this study comprised of number of internet users in Nigeria from 2021. As
projected by statistic (2021), 108, 37 million Nigerians use the internet. This number is expected to increase by
2022 to 120.42 million. This number represents 51% of the total population of Nigeria, which is projected at
211,400, 708 according to Macro trends (2021).
The researchers derived a sample size of 385 for the study using RaosoftTM sample size calculator.
This calculator appeared first on Google for the best online sample size calculator. It was followed by Survey
Monkey sample size calculator and Australia Beau of statistic sample size calculator. The researchers used
purposive and snowball sampling technique for this study. The researchers purposively distributed the link to
the online questionnaire to 185 respondents in Facebook, WhatsApp and Email. The 185 respondents were
solicited by the researchers to further share the links to their contacts too. The most important criteria for

<<<
selection were first being a citizen of Nigeria; more so, the person must have used twitter before and after the
twitter ban in Nigeria.
Google form was used by the researchers to create the online survey questionnaire contained 20
research items of varying structure and scale. The first six items were to extract demographic data; then, nine
items addressed twitter ban and freedom of speech and expression. The remaining items were on the use of
virtual private numbers and freedom of speech. The researchers established reliability of the online survey
questionnaire using test retest reliability method on 10 respondents. The researchers used two social media
platforms to reach the respondents: Telegram and WhatsApp; and email. The researchers administered the
online questionnaire on the respondents individually. The link was shared directly to 185 respondents by the
researchers ,who requested the respondents to share it too. Data analysis was done using percentage and the
hypothesis was tested using chi-square. The researchers presented the analysed data using frequency
distribution tables and charts (pie charts and histograms).
VII. DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
A. Analysis of Demographic Data
First, demographic data were collected to describe the sample for the study. In addition to describing the sample
in terms of age and location (which was necessary in order to establish the area of the study), other demographic
details were collected to establish that the respondents were knowledgeable enough to provide informed
opinions about the variables under study. Some of the demographic variables such as use of twitter before the
ban served as a moderating variable for the inclusion of respondents into the study. The demographic variables
for this study were age, location, use of tweet before and after the ban, knowledge of VPNs and general
knowledge of the ban of twitter in Nigeria (whether the respondent used twitter or not).
The demographic data when collected and analysed showed that the respondents were mainly between
ages 26 and 30 (with 34.8%) of the overall respondents for this study. This is in line with the assertion by
Statista (2021) that 93% of internet users in Nigeria are youths between this age brackets. (See chart 1 below).
In order to determine the extent of circulation and reach of the online survey and define an area for this study,
the researchers included location as one of the demographic detail. From the study’s data, the survey was filled
in by respondents across 9 states and 23 cities in the country. This represents 22% of the 36 states in Nigeria.
The states reached included: Imo (the researchers ’s state of residence) (47%), AkwaIbom (the researchers ’s
state of origin)(18.1), Benin (1.5%), Delta (4.5%), Jos (6.8%), Bayelsa (1.5%), Rivers (5.5%), Ibadan (1.5%)
and Lagos (13.6%). Some of the key cities covered include Ikeja, Port Harcourt, Ikorodu, Owerri and Uyo
among others (See chart 2 below).
Chart 1: Age Distribution of Respondents

<<<
Chart 2: Location Distribution of Respondent
Before Nigeria’s Twitter ban, a majority of Nigerians used Twitter (66.7%), however, there was a
34.9% decrease in the users of Twitter among the participants of this study. The 31.8% of respondents who
claimed to continue the use of Twitter had to use other ways to bypass the restrictions. A majority of them
accessed Twitter using VPN and other measures such as manually adjusting proxy address in the phone setting;
also, using a kind of advanced setting available on Samsung phones users. (Compare charts 3 and 4 below).
Chart 3: Twitter users before the ban
Chart 4: Twitter users after the ban
Although some of the respondents did not use twitter, they were aware of Nigeria’s twitter ban (see
chart 5), so, they were added as respondents for the study. Be that as it may be, respondents who neither used
twitter nor had an idea of Nigeria’s twitter ban were excluded from the study. One hundred and six (106)
participants were affected. This implies that, out of 661 copies of the online questionnaire filed in by
respondents, 106 were invalid; thus, 555 entries were valid and considered useful for further analysis.

<<<
Chart 5: Respondents who did not use twitterbut they were aware of Nigeria‟s twitter ban
Chart 6: Did twitter infringe on PMB'sright to freedom of speech
B. Nigeria’s Twitter ban and freedom of speech and expression
Data were collected and analysed in line with the relationship between the first independent variable (Nigeria’s
Twitter ban) and the dependent variable (freedom of speech and expression). Participants of this study opine that
twitter did not infringe on the right of President MuhammanduBuhari by deleting a post that went against their
term of use. (See chart 6 above). In the open-end section of the online survey, most of the participants provided
reason they feel the right of the presidents was not infringed. They share similar thoughts that established that
the president as well as every Nigerian has his or her right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed and
provided for by the constitution. However, freedom of speech and expression when it comes to social media are
not guaranteed expect they work in line with the terms of use of the social media platform. Therefore, since the
tweet by the president is said to have violated some of Twitter’s terms of use; deleting the tweet within this
context did not constitute an infringement of right. In addition, a majority of the respondents disagreed with the
reaction of the president. 86.4% of respondents do not think that President MuhammanduBuhari reacted
appropriately by banning twitter for deleting his tweet that went against its terms of use. (Check chart 7 below).
Chart 7: PMB‟s reaction

<<<
Chart 8: Nigeria‟s Twitter ban infringed Nigerian‟s right to freedom of speech and expression
A serious implication of Nigeria’s Twitter ban is, according to a majority of the participants in the
study (93.9%) (See chart 8 above), is the infringement of the rights of Nigerian’s to freedom of speech and
expression. One of the respondents in the open-ended survey section opined that “banning twitter is an abuse of
the right of every Nigerian citizen to freedom of expression as stated by the Nigeria constitution”. Another
participant who commented on the extent to which the ban infringed on the right of Nigerian’s freedom of
speech and expression observed that:
Twitter has previously acted as a medium to gang up against the [Nigerian]
government and asking them to do better, as can be seen in the event of the
#EndSARS protest that held [in October, 2020], Twitter was the major source of
communication and considering the efficacy of that movement, banning Twitter
is like taking away the voice of the people [Nigerians].
Participants’ opinion presented during the study goes further to show that they believed that Nigeria’s
Twitter ban was a step by the government to absolutely regulate social media (see chart 9 below). The Nigeria
government is fighting tooth and nail to see that social media in the country is regulated and monitored. A
couple of attempted have been made and Nigeria’s Twitter ban as reported by the respondents of this study has
been perceived as the first step in the line of this endeavours. The ban, from the study is uncalled for, especially
in a country that acclaims the practice of democracy. In trying to establish at least one positive side to Nigeria’s
twitter ban the research asked whether the ban in twitter served as a caution to those who spread and disseminate
hate speech on social as well as possibility reduce the rate of internet fraud in the country (since it is believed
that twitter is one of the platforms where these frauds happen). Chart 10 and 11 showed that respondents
countered the two assumptions of a positive side to Nigeria’s twitter ban; while 65.2% hold the believe that
Nigeria twitter ban did not caution people sharing hate speeches and violent content on social media. Also,
56.1% disagree that Nigeria’s twitter ban was positively related to decrease in internet fraud. Consequently, it
was believed that the mass media (also known as the press) is the aspect of society that has been mostly affected
by Nigeria’s Twitter ban (39.4%). The media is directly followed by digital marketer (24.2%) who are believed
to leverage greatly on social media especially twitter to connect with their target audience and business network.
See chart 12 below.
Chart 9: Twitter ban and government regulationof social media

<<<
Chart 10: Twitter ban and hate speech
Chart 11: Twitter ban and internet fraud
Chart 12: Twitter ban most affected group of people
C. Use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) and Freedom of Speech and Expression
There are great tendencies that the acronym, VPN, comes with some level of negative connation in Nigeria
because of its abusive use by internet fraudsters. In order to establish the perception of respondents on the use of
VPNs, the researchers asked the respondents whether they assumed that the general use of VPNs was illegal in
the country. Amidst the abuse of VPNs, participants in the study still maintained a positive attitude towards the
use of VPN. A very striking comment is made by one of the respondents in the open-ended question section,
thus: “VPN is legal as well as illegal depending on the user. If the user uses it for legal stuffs then it is legal,
but, where a person uses VPN for illegal things, the VPN becomes. Standing alone, there is nothing that is
illegal about the use of VPNs.” See chart 13 below.
As a matter of fact, with the current matters arising sequel to Nigeria’s twitter ban, VPNs are believed
to be very useful, helpful and instrumental in ensuring that Nigerian’s exercise their right to freedom of speech
and expression (48.5% in chart 14 below)to a very large extent (42.4% see chart 15 below) as enshrined in
section 39 (1) and (2) of the Nigerian constitution of 1999 as amended. No wonder why 63.6% of the

<<<
respondents are of the opinion that even using VPNs to access twitter is not illegal after the federal government
has placed a ban on the use of the platform. Nevertheless, a handful of the respondents expressed fear over using
VPN to access Twitter since the platform has been banned (see chart 16 below). Respondents of the study
showed a strong general support for Nigerians to keep on using VPNs to exercise their freedom of speech and
expression regardless of government’s orders (50% in chart 17). Another sentiment of the respondents closer to
the above state is that neither the president’s ban on twitter nor Nigeria’s use of VPN to access the platform
should be supported as both are on different extremes (37.9% in chart 18). Anything that should be support
should stand in the middle – “virtus in medio stat”.
VIII. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The following are the key findings discussed in the study: twitter did not infringe on the right of President
MuhammanduBuhari by deleting a post that went against their term of use; President MuhammanduBuhari
reacted appropriately by banning twitter for deleting his tweet that went against its terms of use; the
infringement of the rights of Nigerian’s to freedom of speech and expression is a critical concern of the ban;
Nigeria’s Twitter ban was a step by the government to absolutely regulate social media; Nigeria’s twitter ban
was not positively related to decrease in internet fraud; Mass media (also known as the press) is the aspect of
society that has been mostly affected by Nigeria’s Twitter ban.
Also, Nigerians still maintained a positive attitude towards the use of VPN; VPNs are believed to be
very useful, helpful and instrumental in ensuring that Nigerian’s exercise their right to freedom of speech and
expression; Using VPNs to access twitter is not illegal even after the federal government has placed a ban on the
use of the platform; there was a strong general support for Nigerians to keep on using VPNs to exercise their
freedom of speech and expression regardless of government’s orders; Neither the president’s ban on twitter nor
Nigeria’s use of VPN to access the platform should be supported as both are on different extremes (37.9% in
chart 18).
IX. CONCLUSION
The researchers conclude that the right to freedom of speech and expression is a very essential aspect of human
existence. In a democratic society, particularly, the ability for government to tolerant the criticism and
confrontations of its citizen in demand for accountability is the true show of the practice. As far as democracy
remains the government of the people, for the people and by the people; there is still some level of power of that
the people should control over the government. The libertarian movement of the 18th century strongly supports
that information and access to it should be free. The first amendment of the US state constitution as well as the
1999 constitution of Nigeria provides for freedom of speech and expression to back up its democracy. Going
contrary to this provision of the law is robbing democracy of its real essence.
The reaction of President MuhammanduBuhari to the action of twitter towards his tweet goes a long
way to display to the international community the extent of democracy in Nigeria. In as much as, it will be too
sentimental to total dismiss the right of the president to freedom of speech and expression too, it is also
necessary to consider the terms of use of the platform on which this freedom is exercise. Also, there could have
been many other ways to addressing the situation rather than tampering on the very essence of democracy in a
bid to take revenge. This has resulted in serious negative effects on both parties – twitter and Nigeria. The most
problematic is that the media, which is the fourth estate of the realm, seems to be the most affected. The
economy, political and religious sphere of the country has been affected too. This calls for a redress of the
presidential stand on the ban of twitter in line with the suggestions of European Union.
X. RECOMMENDATIONS
In line with the findings of this work, the researchers recommend that:
i. Freedom of speech is an essence element of democracy; thus, people who have access to the power to
grant or restrict should be very cautious when taking action that might infringe, by commission or
omission, the right to one’s freedom.
ii. Twitter and the Nigerian government should ensure that they come to a baseline of understanding in
order to redress their stands on the ban of twitter since it affects a large part of the country, and the
press most especially.
iii. The use of twitter should be left open and legal, as far as, the citizens are using it legally and
legitimately to exercise their right to freedom of speech and expression.

<<<
REFERENCES
[1]. “Again, Senate introduces bill to regulate social media use". Vanguard News. 2019-11-06. Retrieved
2019-11-25.
[2]. “Anti-social Media Bill Passes Second Reading in Senate".THISDAYLIVE. 2019-11-20. Retrieved
2019-11-25.
[3]. “Anti-social media bill: Senator defends alleged plagiarism of Singapore statute". Punch Newspapers.
Retrieved 2019-11-25.
[4]. Akinpelu, Y. (2021). #TwitterBan: All you need to know about Nigerian govt‟s Twitter ban. Retrieved
from https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/465943-twitterban-all-you-need-to-know-
about-nigerian-govts-twitter-ban.html
[5]. Akintayo, A. (2021). Nigeria‟s decision to ban Twitter has no legal basis. Here‟s why. The
Conversation.Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/nigerias-decision-to-ban-twitter-has-no-
legal-basis-heres-why-163023
[6]. Alaribe, K. (2021).Twitter ban: 9 pitfalls of using a VPN. Retrieved from https://1stnews.com/twitter-
ban-9-disadvantages-of-using-a-vpn/
[7]. Alumona, E. (2021). How Nigeria‟s Twitter ban stands to impact people, businesses. Retrieved from
https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/6/7/nigerian-twitter-ban-how-government-restriction-
affects-people
[8]. Asadu, C. (2017). Jonathan reminds Nigerians of „total freedom enjoyed‟ during his tenure. Retrieved
from https://www.thecable.ng/jonathan-reminds-nigerians-of-total-freedom-enjoyed-during-his-tenure
[9]. Boaz, D. (2020). libertarianism.Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from
https://www.britannica.com/topic/libertarianism-politics
[10]. Fee, J. V. (1973). "Book reviews". Today's Speech. 21 (1): 45–48. doi:10.1080/01463377309369084.
ISSN 0040-8573
[11]. Iroanusi, Q. (2019). "UPDATED: Bill to regulate Social Media passes second reading at
Senate".Retrieved 2019-11-25.
[12]. Jalloh, A. (2021). Nigeria's Twitter ban exposes deep rift. Retrieved from
https://amp.dw.com/en/nigerias-twitter-ban-exposes-deep-rift/a-57854660
[13]. Lister (2008).Theories of citizenship. Retrieved from
https://edinburgh.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748633418.001.0001/u
pso-9780748633418-chapter-2
[14]. Macrotrends (2021). Nigeria Population Growth Rate 1950-2021. Retrieved from
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/NGA/nigeria/population-growth-rate
[15]. Oduma-Jato, D. (2021). 10 reasons you should use a VPN. Retrieved from https://1stnews.com/10-
reasons-you-should-use-a-vpn/
[16]. Prestige, I. (2021). Twitter Ban could be of advantage to Nigeria, See Seven benefits of banning
Twitter. Retrieved from https://ng.opera.news/ng/en/digital-
technology/amp/da4cfe16f2866832eda871929bbfcf4e
[17]. Progiant Media (2021). Twitter Ban in Nigeria: Ways It Would Affect Small Business. Retrieved from
https://progiantmedia.com/twitter-ban-in-nigeria-ways-it-would-affect-small-business/
[18]. Statista (2021). Number of internet users in Nigeria from 2015 to 2025 (in millions). Retrieved from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/183849/internet-users-nigeria/
[19]. Vareba, Anthony Leva1, Nwinaene, Vivian-Peace1, Theophilus, Singto Barigborme1, Ken Saro-Wiwa
Polytechnic, Bori1.(2017). Internet Censorship and Freedom of Expression in Nigeria. International
Journal of Media, Journalism and Mass Communications (IJMJMC), 3 (2) 25 – 30.

Implications of Nigeria’s Twitter Ban and Use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) on Freedom of Speech and Expression

More Related Content

Similar to Implications of Nigeria’s Twitter Ban and Use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) on Freedom of Speech and Expression (20)

More from AJHSSR Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Implications of Nigeria’s Twitter Ban and Use of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) on Freedom of Speech and Expression