El-Rufai Phone-Tapping: SERAP Raises Alarm, Says Surveillance Rules Threaten Civil Liberties

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has warned that the country’s current interception and surveillance laws could be misused against ordinary citizens and government critics if they are not thoroughly reviewed and subjected to proper legislative oversight.

The Deputy Director of SERAP, Kolawole Oluwadare, raised the concern on Monday during an interview on Arise Television, where he called for greater transparency and public participation in shaping such regulations.

Oluwadare’s comments followed allegations by former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, who had claimed that he and another individual intercepted a phone conversation involving the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu.

The former Governor’s claims have since sparked renewed debate over the scope and oversight of surveillance powers granted to security agencies.

Reacting to the controversy, Oluwadare insisted that regulations with such far-reaching implications must undergo a thorough legislative process, including public hearings.

“With the kind of weight and power this kind of regulation has, it should go through the legislative process and public hearing. These regulations will take away major rights Nigerians have,” he said.

He argued that the current framework governing interception may not be necessary in its present form, noting that concerns remain over vague wording, insufficient safeguards for civil liberties, and the potential for abuse.

The SERAP deputy director expressed apprehension over how security agencies exercise interception powers.

“It is unclear how agencies like the DSS or the Office of the National Security Adviser utilise these powers, raising concerns that they might be used against civilians or government critics,” he stated.

According to him, regulations of such magnitude, especially those capable of impacting fundamental human rights, must be subjected to robust legislative scrutiny to ensure they strike a balance between national security and civil liberties.

Oluwadare clarified that his position does not amount to opposing an interception framework entirely, but rather advocating for one that aligns with international best practices.

“This stance does not advocate against an interception framework altogether, but rather suggests it should align with models found in other jurisdictions, incorporating robust safeguards as envisioned in existing legal frameworks,” he explained.

Oluwadare added that public participation would not only strengthen accountability but also enhance the effectiveness of such laws in addressing insecurity without undermining democratic freedoms.