Human rights advocates at Amnesty International Nigeria, alongside the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), have strongly urged authorities to release Daniel Ojukwu, a reporter with the Foundation for Investigative Journalism (FIJ). Ojukwu was earlier detained at the Kuje Custodial Centre in Abuja following investigative reports published in 2023 regarding a presidential aide.
The organisations also called for the termination of the prosecution of Ojukwu and FIJ founder, Fisayo Soyombo, over the reports on the expenditure of the Office of the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Sustainable Development Goals (OSSAP-SDGs).
Ojukwu was remanded by the Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday after pleading not guilty to 12 counts of cyberstalking and criminal defamation.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik ordered that he remain in custody until December 1, when his bail application is scheduled for hearing.
Amnesty International, in a statement posted on Facebook on Wednesday, said the prosecution raised concerns about the treatment of journalists investigating allegations of corruption.
“The continued prosecution and detention of Ojukwu appear to be part of a broader pattern of using the criminal justice system to punish journalists for exposing allegations of corruption and holding public officials accountable,” it said.
SERAP urged President Bola Tinubu and the Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, to secure Ojukwu’s release and stop the use of criminal defamation and cyberstalking charges against journalists for doing their jobs.
The organisation said the case was linked to FIJ reports published between November 2023 and January 2024, which raised questions about payments of N147.1m and N47.5m for classroom construction projects.
One report questioned a N147.1m payment by the SDGs office to a restaurant for classroom construction in Lagos, while another examined a N47.5m contract awarded to Tru3 Nigeria Limited and raised questions about the company’s status and failure to mobilise to the project site.
Other reports examined the failure of solar panels installed in classroom blocks a week after installation and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s forfeiture of N241m linked to the SDGs office.
SERAP said the allegations required explanations from relevant authorities rather than criminal proceedings against the journalists.
“The proper response to investigative reporting that raises questions about public expenditure is to provide explanations, disclose relevant records and, where necessary, investigate allegations of wrongdoing—not to subject journalists to criminal prosecution and imprisonment,” it said.
The Nigeria Police Force filed the 12-count charge against Ojukwu and Soyombo over four FIJ reports concerning Adejoke Orelope-Adefulire, a former Senior Special Assistant to President Muhammadu Buhari on Sustainable Development Goals and former Lagos State deputy governor.
The police accused the journalists of conspiring to commit cyberstalking and criminal defamation.
After Ojukwu pleaded not guilty, prosecution counsel, Kunle Lawal, asked the court to remand him in custody.
His lawyer, Atanda Kayode, opposed the request and urged the court to allow him to remain on the administrative bail earlier granted by the police, saying he had not breached its conditions.
However, Justice Abdulmalik declined the request, saying the bail application was not ripe for hearing, and ordered his remand at Kuje.
The prosecution also told the court that Soyombo was at large and requested a bench warrant for his arrest, but the judge declined, saying he had not been brought before her.
What You Should Know
This case highlights the growing tensions between investigative journalism and government accountability in Nigeria, particularly concerning reports on public funds and procurement processes.
- Positive Impact: The strong public advocacy by civil society organizations helps protect press freedom and ensures that accountability mechanisms remain visible to the public.
- Potential Concerns: The use of cybercriminality and defamation charges against journalists creates a chilling effect on media houses, potentially discouraging thorough investigations into public spending and government contracts.
