Rethinking the NDPA Amendment
When legislation begins to focus more on narrative control than practical problem-solving, it risks becoming a blunt instrument rather than a tool for constructive reform. This concern is front and centre as the National Assembly considers a proposed amendment to the Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) 2023.
Sponsored by Senator Ned Nwoko of Delta State, the amendment seeks to mandate that all social media platforms operating in Nigeria establish physical offices within the country. Having passed its second reading in the Senate, the bill presents itself as a matter of data protection. However, its potential implications extend well beyond safeguarding personal information.
Supporters of the bill argue that it aims to address certain gaps in the original Act. Yet critics, including civil society advocates and legal experts, note that Nigeria already has substantial frameworks in place to govern the digital space—chief among them the Cybercrimes Act and provisions of the Terrorism Prevention Act. Rather than reinforcing these laws, the amendment risks introducing overlapping, and at times, contradictory measures that could undermine key constitutional freedoms.
Of particular concern are Sections 25 and 26 of the existing NDPA, which some observers say conflict with the Freedom of Information Act and Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression. The addition of further restrictive clauses may place these rights under greater strain.
The requirement for social media companies to maintain brick-and-mortar offices within Nigeria also appears increasingly out of step with modern global practices. In an era where digital platforms operate across borders using remote teams and cloud infrastructure, physical presence is no longer the default model. Mandating such an approach may discourage investment and innovation, while sending a message that Nigeria is hesitant to embrace contemporary digital norms.
Moreover, these companies already contribute significantly to the national economy. Reports indicate that in the first half of 2024 alone, major platforms paid an estimated $2.5 billion in taxes to Nigerian authorities. In addition, they provide livelihoods for thousands of Nigerians—from content creators and freelancers to IT professionals and digital marketers. Disrupting these structures without clear justification could have unintended economic consequences.
It is also worth acknowledging that this bill does not exist in isolation. Over the past few years, several legislative efforts have attempted to regulate online spaces, including the previously withdrawn Social Media Bill and the proposed Hate Speech Bill. These initiatives have often sparked concern among Nigerians who view them as potentially restrictive to civic engagement and open discourse.
The events surrounding the 2020 #EndSARS protests highlighted the delicate balance between regulation and rights. During that period, the suspension of Twitter and other interventions affected digital organising and communication. For many, those actions served as a reminder of the fine line between policy and overreach.
Advocates of the current amendment may cite national sovereignty and data security as guiding principles. These are valid considerations, particularly in an era of increasing cyber threats and global data concerns. However, the enforcement of such goals should be approached with nuance and care, ensuring that regulation does not become an avenue for restricting legitimate expression or innovation.
Physical offices, while administratively convenient, can also become points of vulnerability—susceptible to political pressure or administrative hurdles. Creating more entry points for regulatory enforcement should be balanced with safeguards that protect fair competition, open dialogue, and fundamental rights.
As Nigeria continues to position itself as a growing hub for technology and digital enterprise in Africa, it must also embrace policies that encourage trust, participation, and global collaboration. Laws governing digital spaces must be future-focused, transparent, and inclusive of the diverse voices that power Nigeria’s online economy.
This moment presents an opportunity to refine—not restrict—the NDPA. Rather than hastening through legislative changes that may inadvertently stifle progress, lawmakers should work in close consultation with stakeholders, including civil society, tech experts, and everyday users.
In safeguarding digital freedom, Nigeria is not only upholding constitutional values but also investing in its economic and democratic future. The conversation around the NDPA amendment should be open, informed, and rooted in a shared commitment to progress that benefits all citizens.
Care must be taken to ensure that the laws we write today do not limit the possibilities of tomorrow.
