 As reactions continue to trail Twitter suspension in Nigeria, we take a dip dive into its effect on the people, the economy and the polity. A PDP Chieftain tells us when banditry would end if the federal government sponsors factional bandits. This is Plus Politics and I am Mary Anacorn. Days after the Nigerian government announced the indefinite suspension of Twitter, reactions are still trailing the development. Netblocks and international internet monitor stated that an estimated 2 billion Naira has been lost to the ban on Twitter by the Nigerian government. In a statement, the Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami said he had directed for immediate prosecution of offenders telling the public prosecutors to swing into action. And while responding, human rights activist, senior advocate of Nigeria Michael Zekome asked the federal government to get ready to build more prisons to accommodate airing Nigerians who are likely to bypass the ban on Twitter usage. Joining me to have this conversation is Confidence Daivle. She is a tech expert and a cyber security expert. Also is Kala Wale Uluwadari. He is of Serap and also joining us via telephone is Shegun Shopitan of Act Network. Thank you very much, gentlemen and lady. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for having us. All right, I'm going to start with Confidence because she's a tech expert. So a lot of, I've been in tech forums for the past two days talking about how, what this means for those who use Twitter as a place for their businesses and how much money Nigeria has lost as a country. But again, let's stop by talking about the fact that people are using VPNs until now I probably, most of us probably wouldn't know what a VPN is and explain to us, give us a background into how these VPNs work and if there are any downsides to it. So I got exactly the same kind of text message on my father yesterday. He wrote me, I was like, oh, your Twitter generation, oh, you pooping, it doesn't ban. By the way, what is VPN? So I'm going to answer that question the way I answered my father. VPN is the acronym for Virtual Private Networks. I mean, back in the day when we used to play with some, with tissue rolls and things, we would make the tissue roll into a tube that would combine them together. So one person is going to have one at their ear and then the other person is going to have the other side of the ear or at their mouth. So the other person will speak and the other person will hear, but to that tunnel only. So think about that tunnel we used to create as children. I don't know if you've heard as much as I did, but I created one of those. Think about it where one person is speaking and one person is listening. But on both ends, if you don't have that channel on your ear or your mouth, you will not be able to communicate at the time. Other people also outside of that environment that do not have that connector will also not be able to hear or speak to either of you. So that's exactly what a VPN is. You have communications from end to end, but they're only passed through a tunnel which allows outsiders not to be able to easily drop on that communication. So on its own, a VPN is actually a security tool because it helps you ensure that you are communicating confidentially on the internet, which means that no other person can easily drop on your conversation. So for example, if I'm on a public Wi-Fi, it's advised by security experts like myself that if I want to carry a confidential or very sensitive transactions like use my bank app, then I should get on a VPN on a public Wi-Fi. So hackers around will not be able to get and sniff out data that I'm transmitting. So actually a VPN before this time has other uses apart from transmitting yourself in seconds to another country, which is now the use that is currently in this case being used for. So if a VPN has many other uses, one of them is what we're currently using now, which includes being able to use another server, bounce off traffic around the internet, and make it seem like somebody's in another location apart from the location they currently are in. But the primary use of a VPN is actually privacy. Is it safe? Because the question everybody's asking is, is it safe? Because we've seen all kinds of messages all through the weekend saying, oh, do not open your bank app if you're using a VPN. Do not do this. If it actually has downside, is it really safe? Because the picture you're painting to me is that it ensures some form of privacy. But how safe is that privacy? Is my information safe under that tunnel, or will it come back to bite me in the back? Okay, it depends on what kind of VPN, so it's still subjective, it's not a yes or no answer. So a lot of people now, because of the rush of what's happening, people are downloading free VPNs. With the free VPNs as well, they're not sure about what, you've not read the privacy policy most likely, you don't know what in the line technology is. Most of them are just set up as proxies that may not be accountable per se. So I would definitely not advise someone to randomly download a free VPN right now. But for the more trusted version, the more trusted VPNs that usually require you to pay some for, which, for example, will also not have place advertisements on those platforms, I hold on more secure and can ensure that privacy assures us on a very, very high level as well. So I would say that either buy a VPN that you pay for, usually they'll be from a good service provider, or use a VPN of virtual platform as part of the features of already existing security software that you have. Some antiviruses have that feature as a VPN being part of its features. Some password managers as well also have a VPN as part of its features. In that context, a VPN is way safer. I'm going to come back to you because there's more news as a consensus Twitter and other tech issues that Kolaulay and Shegul might not be able to talk about, but we will put you on pause. Let me come to Kolaulay. The SERAP was one of the first organizations that took up the federal government on the issue of the ban of Twitter over the weekend. SERAP, like I always say, is always on its toes, with a lot of lawsuits against either the federal government or some power statels or governors. Why did SERAP think that it was okay to take the federal government on? I mean, the federal government has said that they're doing this in the interest of unity of the country as there are people who seek to, you know, break down that unity that we once used to enjoy. Thank you. The first and foremost, because we are Nigeria, a user of Twitter, not only to do our advocacy, but also to get information from the cyber and we believe that what the Minister of the Commission has done for this on lawful and the law is clear that one need not be a senior lawyer to understand that a minister cannot make law. The minister is not a member of the National Accenture. That is why we have a lot of people there to do that job. And so by a public statement, a minister cannot create an offense. And then the same, the same statement tried to punish people by that public statement. And that is why we accept that we're going to go to court to challenge the ban of association or whatever name you want to call it. And Jarata would see these subsequent events that lead credence to the unjustifiability of that act by the government. Let me pick out some of the things that have been major headlines. The NBC, which is the body that controls the media in Nigeria, have put out a press statement saying that all media houses should suspend their Twitter handles. This is because certain media houses were still using their Twitter handles to post their stories. Because again, social media is now the next big thing. It's gone from you buying newspapers at some newspaper stands to reading it off the palm of your hands. But then the NBC has said all media houses should suspend that and not even make a reference to Twitter, anything that somebody posted on Twitter. And this again has gotten a lot of eyebrows raised because people are wondering why this should be a directive from the NBC. But of course the NBC is trying to make sure that people adhere to the government's ban on Twitter. Now again, Malami, the attorney general of the Federation, has come out to say that he's going to prosecute those who are offenders, those who have bypassed the system to continue to tweet. How does that even work? And what would be written on the statement, if I were to be arrested for using Twitter, using VPN? Is that legal? Is that constitutional? I'm just saying, if I were to be arrested. Again, the attorney general is a member of the the position of that. He wouldn't be in a senior lawyer. He cannot make law. He cannot. He's not a member of the National Assembly. Now it's really, it makes the mind what the motive of the attorney general is to make that statement. The law is clear in that regard. The same constitution that gives up the right to take on the expression in section 69 also provides for the principles that on this four criminal liability section by the 6th or the 12th. And it's not simple. One, it simply says that for anyone to be prosecuted for any criminal offense, such an offense must be defined before and in written law. And so the question is, there is no written law in Nigeria. And written law in that context means an act of the National Assembly or a law passed by a state out of a sentence. In Nigeria, this day as well, there is no law that criminalizes the use of social media or Twitter as a platform. So when the attorney general said to prosecute, it's really the important question to ask is on that law with someone who prosecuted and to keep in mind that the law, where laws are stated, the law creates an offense to create a punishment. And that is why George cannot punish an offender without looking at the starting books as the minimum or highest recommended analysis. So in this instance, in the absence of a law that suffocates a judge, what were the judge used as the pronouns, either obviously guilty or even prescribed punishment, it cannot stand. And to go to the aspect of the NDP, I saw that statement, that using the words in elective and advised in the same statement to broadcast the media, I said, really, this is the same NDP that we need to code that set up a challenge. We are challenging it in court, but to defend the question. And this would be the thought that we could go to court on this issue as well, about the propriety of the NDP code and the way the national broadcasting functions isn't the code to stifle the freedom of expression. This again is just an instance of common stifling, conversation and dissent. But I would say that this is not a media reaction like some would think. This is a well thought out plan, even though not intended possibly to stifle the dissent of people who perceive that that is critical views of government. Ultimately, the civic space works so far for it. And that participatory performance is being drawn to the dog. Okay. Shagu Chopra is joining us on the phone. Shagu, let's talk about the FIJ and I'd like to quote them directly. They said that the background to this whole Twitter embryo started when the NSAS protest was on in 2020. And they said, this protest did not just happen on the streets in Nigeria. It did happen on social media. And then social media, of course, Twitter did give a logo of sorts to support that protest. And that was the beginning of the problems of Twitter in Nigeria. In fact, the government felt a need to control the cyberspace more while we were in the thick of the NSAS movement. And now here we are, almost a year later, with sudden unsolved and unanswered questions. I mean, over the weekend, we heard that a story broke of bodies that were identified as some of the people who were killed as a result of that protest. But my question to you is, where does civil society come in here? Because there seems to be a collaborative silence of sorts. We hardly had any governor, except the Ayoste governor, who's spoken up against this, asking that the federal government rethink this particular move. But we've not really had governors, per se, step up, even the governors that are in opposition. Does it seem to you that maybe our governments, whether they be of the APC or the PDP, are okay with the idea of somewhat stifling the voices of the people, especially on a platform that's very vocal, as Twitter? I don't think Shagu can hear me. So I'm going to throw that question back to Kala Walee. Mr. Kala Walee, can you hear me? Yes, go ahead. Maybe you'd attend that question. You need to be banned. Sorry? Yeah? So it is really difficult to understand the motives of governments. And that is why maybe in this instance, it's best to get that motive, even from the barriers the spokesman for the various agents, for the prescriptions and for the minister of information and from the African-American participation has to be a motive. But from what we've seen, this is an attempt to stop people from engaging. And the reason rightly said, I think it stems from the way the engagement took during the NSAS protest, both free during the protest and after the protest. One thing is to understand that engagement needs to be done by the citizens. Of course, some people may be responsible in the use of platforms, but of course that doesn't justify this calm down, freedom of expression. At least not in democracy, like we are in Nigeria. So it's an ill will that will blow no one's mind, ultimately. But NSAS and what it has brought is what governments should learn from how to participate in the engagement. And it's interesting, quite a long story, that the minister of information actually tweeted on Twitter about the ban of Twitter. So what does that say about the, even the minister of defense puts out updates about the fight against the terrorism. I think on Twitter too, there's another social media problem. When is that over? Russia is like lately that way. It is for government to understand it's use. And I believe that, and we've said this over time and again, we have enough law that punish any responsible use of social media. There are laws that it takes you of legal and defamation. And defamation, and there's a cyber contact, even though some sections of that, there was also a question of the law. There's no need for this time. Ultimately, it's not going to help anyone. And as to the government, that's not the only thing. I don't think we should use the use of an arm, that's a crime, that will not add to the government. In rules, they would appear that that same attitude of the president also applies to the various states. And that's what we see in fractions on freedom of the press. And freedom of expression is not related. It cuts across parties at the party line. And it cuts across from the highest level of government to the lowest. It is explained that those in government seem to fear the citizens because they feel any critical need is seen as being unoppositioned without understanding the need for that conversation, even if it's not palatable. Interesting. I'll come back to you. Let me go back to confidence. Now, another story that broke today, obviously, we all woke up to the fact that quoting the federal government, having a partnership of sorts with China to get a firewall of sorts, something similar to what China itself has had over the years, blocking out the likes of Twitter from its cyber space. So what does this mean for us as a country and how long does it take to build a firewall in the first instance? And is this another way of keeping people out of not just Twitter, but maybe every other form of social media. And in the case of China, if I'm not wrong, there are options. China's tech industry is superb. Do we have anything to rival these social media platforms if we were to face them out with this firewall? Thank you so much for that very brilliant question. So for start, let's understand what a firewall is in the first place. It's not fire on the wall. It's actually a general tool that allows for filtering of network traffic. So what goes into the organization and what comes out? I mean, in the context of a business or an organization. So firewalls are in use again, just like VPN is currently for protective measures. So it filters what comes in from the exterior network, which is the internet, into the interior network, which is the organization's internal network. So you see that a firewall is currently in use for monitoring purposes. It's also used for filtering purposes. Now, translate this to, let's say the way a firewall works within an organization. Because Facebook can be destructive in your workplace, or your workplace might have policies such as, you know, you're not watching porn, because watching porn is going to, you know, sometimes download half the code on the computers of this organization. So what happens is that the software is developed, sorry, a firewall is deployed, just like every other preventing measures. And then they block out, you know, certain word keywords, certain words, or they block out certain web addresses that are known to be harmful, so like porn websites. Those blocks are called rules. So those rules are what helps in filtering the network, filtering whatever comes in and out. So the firewalls are in use. I'm just saying that to establish a firewall actually a security tool in use to protect people. In the context of being used, the way the Nigerian government wants to use it, and the way China wants to use it, or rather, China uses it, is also the same way, but filtering such a way that it sends us what people can get to see, what people can get to interact with, without the confines of the timeline. You know, while you're in a geographic location, that rule applies to you, while you're accessing internet on that geographical location, it applies to you. So a firewall in that context really is really starting and it could be used in many, in many ways. It could be used to, for example, monitor and be able to ensure that certain views are suppressed, and that's the scary part. And you just can, You're not able to access certain information that is vital for you to access, or you can also ensure that assembly is actually curtailed. And these are all things that are negative. Okay, before you continue, sorry, let me just comment, you talked about monitoring, and that might just also be an infringement of our privacy and our rights. If a government has a right to monitor what we're doing, that can also mean that people can be targeted. And this, I'm sure, one way or the other, could be an infringement of our rights, and it could be against the Constitution, except laws are put in place, right? Exactly, yeah. So monitoring is a big part of what a firewall is going to do in this context. I mean, it could monitor your private conversations that are not supposed to be listened into once they're passing through the web and they are not encrypted. Again, even if they're encrypted, it depends on what level, what I mean encrypted, that means they're locked and ensure that only the people you intended for get it. So even with that, if it's a certain level of encryption, then it becomes really locked in. But then if it's still, you're still going to be able to filter. So if the user that performs Twitter today, it might be another platform tomorrow that people pivot to. If it doesn't agree with what the government wants to the citizen at the time to interact with them, they're definitely going to also block that as well. So it's going to be, it's going to be, we are just starting off, let me put it that way, very, very nice sense. And speaking about this in comparison to China, China has a well-established technology. In fact, I say that this is going, this is a slow suicide for the Nigerian tech industry. What's currently happening? Because not only is investor confidence being lost, we know that the tech industry is currently contributing very high to the GDP of Nigeria. So if investor confidence is shaky, and we're setting the shockwaves at a time when we should be recovering, when we should be attracting investment, where unemployment is an issue, and we are having this sort of shake-up in the tech industry that is causing investors to pull out, it means people are going to be losing jobs. And we've seen it on Twitter even recently, we've seen it where people are, their developer teams are divided currently because investors are pulled out. We're also seeing that even the alternative platform that was once floated, we said, we looked at the privacy policy of that network, and we saw that it literally felt like having your back outside, because privacy is out the roof with this particular indigenous platform that we have. And the only one of that. So really, we don't have the technical expertise, the technical tools to supplement Twitter. We also have this particular, but it's taking a very negative effect on investor confidence, which is going to actually result in losses in millions of dollars in investment already made, because people are actually making exist, as we speak, and also prospective investments into Nigeria. So this has a real negative effect across multiple sectors and especially in the tech industry. Okay, well, that's scary, but let me come to Shago. Shago, can you hear me now? Shago, can you hear me? All right. Well, so that we can let Mr. Kalawale go. Finally, Kalawale, you just heard Confidence state that there will be monitoring if we do have this firewalls, meaning that conversations might be listened into and meaning that people can also be targeted. How do we make sure that everything that the government decides to do if they finally, you know, go with it is done constitutionally and the rights of the average Nigerian is not trampled on? Well, I think... I think we could say we're going to be bound for spending as well, if we're going to join us in this conversation. That being said, the proper way would be to pass law of enabling legislation to create a legal framework for all this, but that itself is a problem. And we've seen the government try to do that with the age, each day of the social media deal and some part of the NGO deal. Ultimately, it is not about the legal test, it is about the trust that the people have of those who are going to demand those laws that they're going to use it against the people. So, from what confidence has said about the like you, I like you, not monitoring if there's a firewall in play. The question that we need to ask is what is the motive of government for having a firewall? We can define that motive now. That doesn't, that's a rocket science. It is to stop automation along the lines of what the government defined as not before. So, we will have given that government that right to define what we should hear, what we should not hear by looking at information and what we hear or see as before. That means how we engage and what we say. So, that itself is bad. I don't see in any legal framework that will help the people. Having said that, there are constitutional provisions that clearly provide that if any law is passed, you know, by the state out of assembly or the national assembly, that is in conflict with the constitution the constitution will prevail. And because constitutional provisions of privacy are paramount, naturally any law that tries to have the great from those rights will be null and void of an unknown effect. But the question is, do Nigeria's trust its government to add a law that gives them any kind of power, any standards of power to regulate what we see and hear? I think I want to find a way to do that. Mr. Chopital, can you hear me now? Unfortunately, today is not a good day for Shagu Chopital's line of I guess that his line has been banned too. But finally, Kola Wale, the excuse that the government keeps giving and you just asked my other question because I was going to ask that, look, we already having, we had had town hall meetings, we had had hearings on how to tweak our constitution. And people are still debating on the sincerity on the part of us, our legislators and the government to make laws that would one way or the other favor the people as a matter of fact, we have complained about the 1999 constitution as amended, as part of the problems that we're facing today in the country. So if we are going to trust them more to deal with how we express ourselves on social platforms, can we trust them to make the right choices for us? But the federal government continuously points to Twitter as a platform that's trying to balkanize the nation as this is an institution they keep making. Is Twitter really trying to balkanize Nigeria? And what do they get out of it if that really is the case? I wouldn't want to speak for Twitter but the content and antecedent that we understand, the way news travels around country that we are with the high population of the rural and of the educated I doubt it will die with something government to watch. Look at what's happening. If all you wake up, you find 20 messages including 17 videos and some pictures taking last 30 seconds and this morning on the phone. Does that mean you have to ban or suspend WhatsApp? No, I don't think so. And saying Twitter is a problem and it does shine away from the problems we have because the economic and the political issues that we have are not caused by Twitter. And I would say clearly that those problems too are not caused by President Bari. No. They fail, they fall in. But the question is what are these administrations down to solve those problems? And if a man in the Constitution is going to go along to solve those problems and I believe it's all then it should be amended in that light. But as to whether we can stop the government with any kind of kind of discussion that takes a little bit of a right and clearly we've given my expression I wouldn't want to I wouldn't want to say that. Okay. Well, we're out of time. I want to thank I want to thank confidence Dave Lee. She is a cyber security expert. Kalaululululuadare is of Sarah. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen for being part of this conversation. All right. Thank you very much. Well, we'll take a short break now when we return we discuss a suggested method to end insecurity as soon as possible. The goals who are suggesting it we'll get to find out after the break.