In today’s digital and information age, social media platforms serve as powerful tools for consumers to voice their opinions and concerns regarding products and services. However, a recent incident in Nigeria involving an online food reviewer and a food processing company has brought to question the delicate balance between the legal ramifications surrounding online expression ‘consumer review’ and the Nigerian Cybercrime Act of 2015.
It began on September 17, 2023, when the reviewer took to her Facebook page to express dissatisfaction with a particular product of the food processing company. Alleging an unhealthy amount of sugar in the product, her post ignited controversy, prompting the company to swiftly defend its reputation and products.
In response to the claims, the company vehemently denied the allegations, accusing the reviewer of orchestrating a malicious attack on its brand. The company’s statement emphasised its commitment to producing healthy and quality products, vowing to take necessary actions against any perceived threats to its reputation.
However, the situation took a troubling turn when the company escalated the matter by petitioning the police, alleging criminal conspiracy, blackmail, and cyberbullying.
Amidst growing concerns over the reviewer’s alleged harassment, the Corporate Accountability and Public Participation Africa (CAPPA) condemned the intimidation, highlighting broader issues of civic space and accountability in Nigeria. CAPPA’s Executive Director, Akinbode Oluwafemi, underscored the fundamental rights of individuals to provide honest product reviews without fear of victimisation.
Furthermore, international organisations such as Amnesty International weighed in on the matter, condemning the reviewer’s arrest as a violation of freedom of expression.
According to the police, a preliminary investigation revealed that the reviewer allegedly violated specific sections of the Cybercrime Act of 2015. According to the police, her review, though seemingly unharmful, had crossed boundaries related to the proper use of cyberspace.
In response to mounting pressure, the police reaffirmed its commitment to upholding the rule of law in the matter. It emphasised the necessity of enforcing existing legislation, including the Cybercrime Act of 2015, to counteract violations of the law and misinformation on social media.
As the trial unfolds, questions linger. Is the reviewer a victim of corporate intimidation, or did she overstep her digital bounds? Does the food company’s pursuit of justice threaten the very essence of free speech as enshrined in our constitution? And what role does the Cybercrime Act play?
Certainly, the saga transcends mere product reviews. It delves into the heart of our digital existence and freedom of expression.
