Hate speech: Some flaws in the coming law

Hate speech is dangerous to a nation, especially so for a nation of diverse ethnic groups cultures and religion as Nigeria is. Hate speech has capacity to ignite communal conflict that can easily bring about mindless destruction of lives and property in unimaginable proportions. From a slight spark of careless conversation, emerges mayhem. World over today with the upsurge of populism and the availability of the internet, hate speech has become the biggest security threat to many countries. The world is grappling with the immense power the internet and the carry-about telephone handset has conferred on individuals to communicate instantaneously, through Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and many others. In use by persons, all and sundry, or groups motivated by clandestine agenda, the new media technically is as dangerous as it is immensely beneficial.

We are witnesses to the impact Facebook and Wikileaks have made on the American elections enabling Donald Trump to upset all bets to defeat Hilary Clinton in 2016. We also notice how with a tweet, Donald Trump is able to run the world, quarrel and settle with his counterparts in Europe and Asia, impose trade sanctions in billions such that more than jolts the global economy, or take American troops out of Syria allowing Turkey to invade territories against the conventional run of play. Earlier on, we have seen how the Arab Spring which refers to the democratic uprisings that arose independently and spread across the Arab world in 2011, beginning from a protest by a lone person setting himself on fire in Tunisia, setting off a backlash of riots hat toppled that regime, and from there, spread across the Arab world. The riots quickly took hold in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan. Globally sights and sounds are made instantaneously, to good or bad and disastrous effect. World over, regimes are very sensitive to what hate speech propelled especially by this power of the social media can cause. Thus the leaning is towards laws and actions that are aimed at enforcing control of social media and in deed, the internet.

Here in Nigeria, our challenge is that our operation of democracy is in the crudest form with multiple dichotomies. How do we define hate speech? Who defines it? Who determines it? The Executive and the Legislature have this ‘us and them’ attitude towards the public. Rhetoric from functionaries of the two arms qualify as hate speech given the reaction their pronouncements set off within opposition groups on the one hand. On the other hand, there seems to be no compassion from authorities, for a people suffering from harsh economic recession caused by mismanagement made possible solely by leaders, as it is the masses that bear the brunt of all economic structural adjustments that aim to curtail comfort and by which the poor are stripped to the bone. In this regard, it is frustrating that you are free to hate what is done to you but to criticize the powers responsible is considered hate speech. Hate speech is triggered by the anti-people policies fashioned out and executed without assessing impact. Whereas constructive criticism helps governments to adjust in the public interest, in Nigeria, it is defined broadly as speech in hate of government and the people in power. We have a hailer and wailer political community in our polity.

Legislators are the worst in this display of the ‘us and them’ narrative. It is they who earn fat emoluments for little work, and yet, corner constituency funds, executing no projects, and justifiably in the end suffer the long end of the tongue of their angry and bitter constituents. It is assumed that this consideration triggered this second attempt to introduce the hate speech law. Yet talk against government or individuals in this regard should not constitute hate speech and should be tolerated. In deed such “hate” speech is evidence that people are choked to a point of running out of breath. It is in truth, murmured talk-back, the reaction to every action against the helpless, and should be heeded. The only panacea is openness and inclusion in governance.

As elaborate as the bill is, Nigerians feel that it is a selfish ploy to emasculate popular opinion. It is seen as totally unnecessary legislation because there are enough provisions in the existing laws of sedition, defamation of character, slander, and incitement, to accommodate any use of the so called hate speech in the social media. It is also feared that in the same way as the laws against smuggling, possession of firearms drug peddling, prostitution and all other vices have not hindered the commission of the crimes, the anti hate speech law would be a mere addition to all flagrantly disregarded laws. The ‘us and them’ narrative is a delusion. Someday the gavel of justice will nail them and us under the very hate speech law being crafted by them, is what the masses are saying.

Alas, our penchant for creating laws we can not enforce and institutions we can not run. Soon the Anti Hate Speech Board will become moribund, just like many boards that are so without support budgetary releases.

Like in developed countries, we need a clear definition of hate speech with the onus for prevention and also punishment resting solely on social media tech giants who allow it, and make huge profits from use or misuse of their technology. They must bear the responsibility for “gating” content. It is they who should be liable for any hate speech they let pass through their gates.

Rebellion against laws that gag is in the hardwiring of the Nigerian, more so, the journalist, politician and the preacher who think their persuasion gives them a licence to speak freely. Social media has made all individuals in our society, one, if not all of these three, journalist, a politician, or a preacher. To my mind, the maxim of prevention being better than cure best applies to Nigeria’s concept of dealing with hate speech. For this I would rather not have draconian laws, for which we do not have the technical capacity to check and enforce. I would rather have social reorientation. We can consciously change the character of our people.