The reported detention and questioning of renowned writer and public intellectual, Prof. Okey Ndibe, upon his arrival at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Lagos, has once again brought into sharp focus the troubling state of freedom of expression and civic space in Nigeria.
Although the authorities reportedly described the incident as a “routine security engagement,” many Nigerians remain understandably concerned about the implications of repeatedly subjecting outspoken critics, journalists, writers, activists, and opposition figures to security scrutiny under circumstances that often appear selective, unnecessary, and intimidating.
In every constitutional democracy, perception matters. When individuals known for their critical views of government policies consistently find themselves on security watchlists, subjected to questioning, or otherwise inconvenienced by state institutions, the inevitable public perception is that dissent is being treated as a security threat rather than as an indispensable component of democratic governance.
This is a dangerous trajectory for any democracy.
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), leaves no room for ambiguity on this issue. Section 39(1) provides:
”Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.”
Similarly, Section 40 guarantees every citizen the right to freely assemble and associate with others for the protection of their interests.
These constitutional provisions are not mere decorative statements inserted into the nation’s supreme law for symbolic purposes. They are fundamental guarantees designed to shield citizens from arbitrary state interference and to ensure that government remains accountable to the people it serves.
Beyond domestic law, Nigeria has voluntarily undertaken binding international obligations that require the protection and promotion of freedom of expression and civic participation.
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
”Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.”
Likewise, Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Nigeria is a State Party, guarantees the right of every individual to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds.
Furthermore, Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, an instrument that has been domesticated and forms part of Nigerian law, guarantees every individual the right to receive information and to express and disseminate opinions within the law.
Importantly, these protections are not reserved for those who praise government. They are most valuable when applied to those who criticize it.
A democracy that welcomes applause but fears criticism is neither democratic nor confident. Governments are elected to serve the people, not to supervise public opinion or regulate legitimate dissent.
The recurring allegations of surveillance, harassment, intimidation, arbitrary arrests, and targeting of journalists, social commentators, human rights defenders, and government critics create an atmosphere of fear that is fundamentally incompatible with constitutional democracy. Whether real or perceived, such actions risk producing a chilling effect on free speech, where citizens become reluctant to express legitimate opinions for fear of attracting official attention or reprisals.
History has repeatedly demonstrated that societies do not become stronger by silencing criticism; they become stronger by listening to it.
Every government, regardless of political affiliation, must understand that criticism is not sabotage. Dissent is not treason. Opposition is not criminality. A writer’s pen is not an instrument of insurgency, and an activist’s voice is not a threat to national security.
Indeed, some of the most celebrated champions of democracy were once dismissed as troublesome critics. Had yesterday’s dissenters chosen silence, many of the democratic freedoms enjoyed today would never have been achieved.
The irony, however, is difficult to ignore. While government institutions appear increasingly preoccupied with monitoring critics, ordinary Nigerians continue to grapple with insecurity, corruption, unemployment, poverty, inflation, and decaying infrastructure. One is therefore tempted to ask, somewhat satirically, whether the gravest threat confronting Nigeria today is no longer terrorism, banditry, kidnapping, or economic hardship, but rather a citizen armed with a pen, a keyboard, and an opinion.
The Nigerian state must resist every temptation to equate criticism with hostility. Strong governments do not fear scrutiny; they welcome it as a mechanism for accountability, transparency, and improvement. Only insecure administrations perceive every dissenting voice as an enemy to be monitored, profiled, intimidated, or silenced.
As citizens, we must remain vigilant in defending the constitutional liberties that generations before us struggled and sacrificed to secure. Freedom of expression is not merely a right belonging to journalists, writers, activists, or opposition figures. It is the lifeblood of democracy itself and the foundation upon which every other liberty rests.
The reported treatment of Prof. Okey Ndibe should therefore serve as an opportunity for sober reflection. Government institutions must reassure Nigerians, through both words and actions, that no citizen will be targeted, harassed, intimidated, or otherwise victimized for peacefully expressing opinions, criticizing public policies, or holding public officials accountable.
Ultimately, the true measure of a democracy is not how it treats its supporters, but how it treats its critics.
Nigeria must decide whether it wishes to be remembered as a nation that nurtured free thought, democratic engagement, and robust public discourse, or as one that increasingly viewed dissenting voices as enemies of the state.
The Constitution, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and the international human rights instruments to which Nigeria is a party all point unmistakably in one direction: the protection of freedom, not its suppression.
That is the path a democratic Nigeria must choose to follow.
Okoye Chuka Peter is the Executive Director of Centre for Human Rights Advocacy and Wholesome Society ( Cehraws )
