The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has filed a lawsuit against the government of President Bola Tinubu at the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice over its alleged failure to withdraw the “unlawful mass phone-tapping rules” known as the Lawful Interception of Communications Regulations, 2019.
The regulations authorise telecommunications licensees to install technology that enables security agencies to monitor communications, including voice calls, data, text messages, emails and internet browsing, for national security and crime prevention.
In a statement issued on Sunday and signed by SERAP Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said the suit followed allegations by former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, that the phone conversation of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, was intercepted.
El-Rufai reportedly claimed: “The NSA’s call was tapped. They do that to our calls too, and we heard him saying they should arrest me.”
In the suit, numbered ECW/CCJ/APP/11/26 and filed last Friday at the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice in Abuja, SERAP is seeking a declaration that the government’s failure to withdraw the interception regulations violates Nigeria’s international human rights obligations.
The organisation is also asking the court to declare that maintaining the regulations amounts to an official endorsement of unlawful mass surveillance, arguing that the rules undermine the rule of law, democratic principles and the right to privacy.
SERAP is further requesting an order compelling the Nigerian government to immediately withdraw the regulations and initiate a legislative process to ensure that any future interception rules comply with international human rights standards.
The suit was filed on behalf of SERAP by its lawyers Kolawole Oluwadare, Oluwakemi Oni, Valentina Adegoke, and Maryam Mumuni.
According to the organisation, the regulations create a sweeping surveillance regime that violates constitutionally and internationally protected rights, including the rights to privacy and freedom of expression.
“Where powers affecting fundamental human rights are exercised in secrecy and concentrated in political authorities without independent supervision, the risks of arbitrariness are substantial,” the suit stated.
It added that surveillance measures lacking strict necessity, proportionality and independent judicial oversight could easily be weaponised against political opponents, journalists, civil society actors and election observers.
SERAP also warned that the regulations raise serious concerns as Nigeria approaches the 2027 general elections, noting that broad interception powers could be abused during politically sensitive periods.
“In an electoral climate, even the perception that private communications are being monitored can chill political organising, investigative reporting and voter mobilisation,” the organisation said.
It argued that free and fair elections depend on confidential communications, protected journalistic sources and open democratic debate, warning that any misuse of intercepted data for intimidation or political advantage would undermine Nigerians’ right to political participation.
SERAP maintained that any restriction on the right to privacy must comply with the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality, which it said the regulations fail to meet.
The organisation also cited the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, which has stated that mass surveillance programmes based on indiscriminate collection of personal data are arbitrary and inconsistent with international human rights standards.
SERAP noted that the Nigerian Communications Commission adopted the Lawful Interception of Communications Regulations, 2019 under Section 70 of the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.
It argued that Regulation 4 grants broad discretionary interception powers to the National Security Adviser and the State Security Services with little clarity on the scope or limits of such authority.
The group also pointed to inconsistencies within the regulations. While Regulation 4 and Regulation 12 restrict interception powers to the NSA and the State Security Service, Regulation 23 expands the list of authorised agencies to include the Nigeria Police Force, National Intelligence Agency, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, National Drug Law Enforcement Agency and any other agency designated by the commission.
According to SERAP, the ambiguity creates the risk of arbitrary application and abuse.
The organisation also criticised provisions allowing interception without a warrant in certain circumstances, describing them as overly broad and susceptible to misuse.
It further expressed concern that the regulations do not require authorities to notify individuals subjected to surveillance, which it said limits citizens’ ability to challenge unlawful monitoring.
SERAP warned that requirements compelling telecommunications companies to install interception equipment and disclose encryption keys could undermine cybersecurity and discourage the use of privacy-enhancing technologies.
While acknowledging the government’s responsibility to address national security and organised crime, the organisation said such measures must remain within constitutional and international human rights limits.
No date has yet been fixed for the hearing of the suit.
