NewStats: 3,261,399 , 8,173,892 topics. Date: Thursday, 29 May 2025 at 07:06 AM 3h4s67

Last September, Chioma Okoli posted on Facebook that a tomato puree she’d just purchased for the first time contained an unhealthy amount of sugar. Less than a week later, its manufacturer had her arrested and detained by Nigerian police.

The 39-year-old, who is pregnant with her fourth child, has been trapped in a legal battle ever since, accused of a cybercrime punishable by up to three years in prison and a fine of seven million Nigerian naira (£3,526).

Her case, which a court adjourned to 28 May, has sparked nationwide debates over whether sharing your opinion online can be considered a crime and whether a company has the right to bring a lawsuit over an unfavourable review and raised questions over Nigeria’s harsh Cybercrime Act.

Okoli, who runs a small business selling imported children’s clothes in Lagos, posted on the social media site to accuse Nagiko Tomato Mix, which is made by Erisco Foods Limited, of having a high sugar content – and asked her 18,000 followers for their opinions on it.

An online spat ensued, with commenters weighing in to either agree with Okoli or defend the product. The situation escalated when one Facebook replied: “Stop spoiling my brother’s product. If [you] don’t like it, use another one than bring it to social media or call customer service.” Okoli responded: “Help me advise your brother to stop ki***ing people with his product, yesterday was my first time using [it] and it’s pure sugar.”

Erisco, an indigenous company, released a statement describing Okoli’s claims as “untrue and unfounded” and petitioned the police to act, accusing her of criminal conspiracy, de-marketing and cyberbullying.

Okoli was arrested as she attended a church near her home on 24 September and detained until the following day. She was then flown to the Nigerian Police Force’s headquarters in the capital, Abuja, and detained for another 24 hours, before being released on bail. It is unclear why Okoli was taken to Abuja, given both she and Erisco are based in Lagos, and the police did not respond to openDemocracy’s request for answers.

While at the force headquarters, Okoli wrote a public apology to Erisco, saying: “I regret my actions, and wish to be forgiven. I pledge that this will never happen again. I undertake to retract all my earlier post on this matter immediately, this is without any compulsion.”

Politician Dozie Ikedife Jr. last month told a TV interviewer that he had stood as bail guarantor for Okoli after being ed by one of her aunties, who, like him, is from Anambra state. In the interview, he claimed Erisco’s founder and CEO, Eric Umeofia, had been in the police headquarters while Okoli wrote the apology, and accused Okoli of absconding to Lagos after her release and failing to return to the police station in Abuja after seven days to explain how the matter was resolved – which had been a condition of her bail. Okoli’s counsel, Inibehe Effiong denied Okoli absconded and claimed she had been “forced” to write “the so-called letter of apology”.

The National Agency for Food and Drug istration and Control released a statement on 29 September confirming that the sugar levels in the Nagiko Tomato Mix were safe for consumption. The following week, police charged Okoli with two counts of “instigating people against Erisco Foods Limited, knowing the said information to be false”, and accused her of violating “some salient parts” of the Cybercrime Act.

Effiong has filed a 500 million naira (£303,654) lawsuit against Erisco and the police on Okoli’s behalf, arguing that her right to personal liberty was violated by being unlawfully detained for more than 24 hours without charge. The lawsuit also wants the company and the police to “publish an unreserved written apology” to Okoli in three national newspapers and on Erisco’s Facebook page.

Erisco has responded with a five billion naira (over £3m) defamation lawsuit against Okoli, which it said in a statement on 19 January is to “safeguard the brand and the company’s reputation”, claiming her comment had “resulted in several suppliers deciding to disassociate themselves from us”.

Effiong has said he will file a countersuit to this on behalf of his client. Speaking to openDemocracy, he said Okoli should be the one claiming defamation because Umeofia, Erisco’s CEO, has “called her a criminal on national TV, accused her of belonging to a criminal syndicate, and accused her of blackmail.”

When approached by openDemocracy, Erisco said: “We don’t want to comment on the issue as the matter is pending in court.”

Source: openDemocracy

The Nursing and Midwifery Council of Nigeria (NMCN) has caused outrage among Nigerian nurses by implementing new guidelines that hinder their ability to seek better opportunities abroad.

Previously, nurses could swiftly authenticate their qualifications for international practice, but now they must endure a cumbersome process, including mandatory two years of service in Nigeria and increased application fees. The Nursing Group (NGA) has taken a stand to challenge these regulations in court.

The number of nurses from Nigeria has surged, with over 42,000 leaving in the last three years alone. Many migrate to the UK, driven by factors like low salaries and poor working conditions back home. While the NHS faces its own nurse shortage, Nigerian nurses abroad encounter challenges such as inadequate pay and unsafe working conditions. Yet, these conditions still often sur what nurses endure in Nigeria.

The revised guidelines not only prolong the verification process but also introduce new requirements, including obtaining letters of good standing from senior doctors. This leaves nurses vulnerable to potential abuse and may worsen their working conditions.

Source: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/nigeria-nurses-nhis-nmcn-working-abroad-guidelines-two-years-brain-drain/

Ghana’s Supreme Court has been thrust into the spotlight after the president ed up responsibility for legislation that could see people jailed for up to three years for identifying as LGBTIQ+.

The future of the Human Sexual Rights and Family Values Bill now rests with the judiciary, despite it having been approved by Parliament on 28 February, three years after it was first introduced.

The Office of the President has refused to take receipt of the bill – the necessary next step for it to be officially signed into law – citing two ongoing lawsuits challenging its constitutionality.

In his only public comments since the bill ed, President Nana Akufo-Addo suggested the fate of the country’s queer community lies in the hands of the Supreme Court, saying: “It would be as well for all of us to… await the decision of the court before any action is taken.”

Gay sex was already illegal in Ghana, and punishable by up to three years in prison, under harsh colonial-era laws introduced by the British. But these laws were vague and have been firmed up and expanded upon by the draconian new bill, which makes it a crime to simply identify as LGBTIQ+ and imposes a jail term of up to five years for forming or funding LGBITQ+ groups.

Some 59% of Ghanaian voters the new bill, according to a poll by Global Info Analytics earlier this month. The 2020 Afrobarometer report found around 90% of Ghanaians do not tolerate LGBTIQ+ people, with 86% saying they approve of criminalising same-sex relationships. Akufo-Addo himself voiced strong opposition to legalising gay marriage in 2021, despite having previously said a move to decriminalise homosexuality in Ghana was “bound to happen”.

There are currently two separate lawsuits challenging the anti-LGBTIQ+ bill at the Supreme Court. One, from academic and gender activist Amanda Odoi argues that it breaches government procedure, as Article 108 of Ghana’s constitution states that only the executive can introduce a bill that will impose a cost on the state. (Policing the bill would force the state to incur new costs.)

On these grounds, the law may be on Odoi’s side. Akufo-Addo has already set a precedent of rejecting private ’ motions by refusing assent to bills that would leave the state picking up new costs, including one that would have replaced the death sentence with life imprisonment (that particular bill, which was ed by Parliament in July last year, seems to have been quietly put on ice).

The other lawsuit, from journalist and lawyer Richard Dela Sky, claims the law is an affront to the human rights of Ghana’s LGBTIQ+ community and violates protections made in the constitution, including over freedom of speech, expression, assembly, association, and freedom from discrimination on the basis of gender, creed or social or economic status and rights to human dignity.

Odoi is optimistic that the legal challenges may have positive outcomes. “We began a process of testing our courts on this issue, and I want to remain hopeful that something good will come out of it.”

Sky agreed, telling openDemocracy: “The constitution, although silent on the matter [of LGBTIQ rights], implies that these rights are there and should be respected.”

He added that the bill will do more than threaten the rights of LGBTIQ Ghanaians because of the overall impact it will have on Ghana’s democratic credentials.

“It is imperative that we scrutinise and challenge any legislative action that appears to contravene the constitution to safeguard our democracy and the rights it guarantees to every citizen,” Sky said after filing his lawsuit.

It remains unclear when the Supreme Court will hear the cases relating to the bill, though it could take so long that the decision over whether or not to approve the bill becomes the next president’s problem. Akufo-Addo will leave office at the end of the year, as Ghana’s two-term presidential limit means he is not eligible to run in December’s general election.

None of the candidates running to succeed Akufo-Addo have made official statements setting out their positions on the bill. But the current favourite to win, John Mahama of the opposition party the National Democratic Congress, urged the president to accept it when speaking to religious leaders earlier this month.

Meanwhile, one of the legislators backing the bill, Rockson-Nelson Dafeamekpor, has launched a legal challenge to force Akfuo-Addo to take receipt of the bill, thus triggering processes that could see it become law.

Five Ghanaian lawyers openDemocracy spoke with for this article agreed that the country’s Supreme Court largely has a good record on the enforcement of fundamental human rights and freedoms. Yet Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua, a professor in international human rights law at the University of Ghana, does not expect the court to issue any ruling that fully decriminalises same-sex relations in Ghana.

Appiagyei-Atua does, however, think the Supreme Court will declare this bill “anti-human rights” – which would mean it could not become law. Pointing out that Article 33 of Ghana’s constitution says the rights outlined in Ghana’s laws are not exhaustive, the law professor suggested the court may do so by recognising new rights.

“The courts can rely on that provision in the constitution to say that even if we are not recognising gay rights, these people are human beings who are entitled to dignity,” he told openDemocracy.

Appiagyei-Atua fears that if the bill is not quashed by the Supreme Court, it could set Ghana back by centuries, to a time “when certain practices denied people their rights simply because they were considered deviants or were believed to have committed sins”.

He added that the bill tramples on the rights of not just queer people but Ghanaian society at large. For example, he said, “if you are a lecturer in the classroom and you want to discuss LGBTQ issues, you could fall foul of the law if you are reported by a student.”

Many of Ghana’s queer community have little trust in the judiciary to quash the bill.

Openly trans musician and activist Angel Maxine told openDemocracy she finds it hard to separate the judges from the politicians who worked to the anti-gay law – feeling they are all of the same establishment.

“From the politicians to the ministers to the judges, they are all the same,” Maxine said. “We can’t trust them and I don’t have confidence in them.”

Another LGBTIQ+ activist, who spoke to openDemocracy on the condition of anonymity, fearing persecution, expressed concern that the judges may be influenced by their religious beliefs.

“There is some hope that they will apply the law,” they said. “However, some people believe that, like most Ghanaians, they will make their religious beliefs determine their opinions, even if it doesn't align with the law.”

Even without having been signed into law, the bill is already severely impacting the lives of queer Ghanaians. Since it was introduced to Parliament in August 2021, LGBTIQ+ communities have said they have suffered an increase in violent attacks, blackmail and kidnappings. The morning after Parliament ed the bill saw alarming misinformation/disinformation from some media outlets, whose reporting wrongly suggested it had already become law – endangering the lives of LGBTIQ+ people.

Maxine has been forced to leave the country since the bill ed, fleeing to in fear of her safety. She expects many other queer Ghanaians will be left with no choice but to do the same. But they would be the luckier ones, she said. “The people who don’t have the choice of leaving Ghana are terrified. They are all scared,” lamented the activist.

For now, Maxine is undeterred, continuing to campaign against the bill from Berlin. “It’s still ‘Kill the Bill,’” she said.

Source: openDemocracy.net

When Twitter announced it would set up its Africa headquarters in Ghana, there was a lot of excitement in the country’s tech sector.

The move established Ghana as a major competitor in the race, against Nigeria, Kenya, and Rwanda, to become Africa’s tech and innovation hub, and was accompanied by a big PR push – president Nana Akuffo Addo said it was the “start of a beautiful partnership” that was “critical for the development of Ghana’s hugely important tech sector”.

Two years later, Twitter had fired almost all of its African employees in Ghana. This happened suddenly, as a result of new owner Elon Musk’s global cost-cutting measures.

Although Twitter employees in other countries received severance packages, those in Ghana did not. Nor did Twitter fulfil its promises to pay the cost of repatriating foreign staff, or the legal expenses incurred during negotiations with the company.

Twitter is a global company, with subsidiaries in other countries such as India. It should be familiar with local labour laws – in this case Ghana’s labour act 2003, section 65, which clearly describes the need for negotiated severance packages in redundancy processes. In not doing this, Twitter deliberately ignored and flouted Ghana’s employment laws.

In November 2022, the ex-Twitter employees sent an appeal to the Chief of Labour Officer expressing their frustrations. Then in early 2023, after being ignored by Twitter, they sought help from the minister of employment and labour relations.

While the minister, Mr. Ignatius Baffour Awuah, did not directly intervene, he did permit the ex-Twitter employees to publicly say that the ministry had formally taken notice of the matter and claimed they were investigating the case after CNN reached out to them for comment. But this weak act did not give the case the traction it needed to draw the attention of Twitter.

The government of Ghana is not known for being silent about employee abuse by foreign companies. In 2016, the ministry threatened to cancel operating licences of companies following a scandal about workers being tortured.

In the end, it took Twitter (now X) almost two years to agree to a redundancy settlement. This only happened after the relentless ex-employees pursued the company, seeking legal assistance and drawing international media attention from the likes of CNN and the BBC.

So why didn’t the government of Ghana the workers? Why did it not sanction Twitter for flouting not only the country’s labour laws but violating the human rights of the ex-employees?

While the government is not expected to directly interfere in private employment relationships, so as not to scare off foreign direct investment, this should have been an exception due to the government's endorsement of Twitter’ establishment in the country and the international interest in Twitter’s poor handling of dismissing their employees.

Multinational corporations are known for not doing enough to protect workers' rights, especially in countries with weak labour laws. It is important that the government of Ghana, using Twitter’s case, set a clear precedent for other interested global tech giants that they cannot engage in labour law violations without repercussions.

Any government that extracts political benefits from Big Tech companies establishing subsidiaries in their country should be responsible enough to protect employees when they are mistreated.

Carla Olympio, the attorney who represented the ex-employees, told me: “In such a high profile case… I believe the National Labour Commission or the Ministry of Employment and Labour Relations could have made a clear and firm statement of its stance of not condoning unfair treatment of Ghanaian employees and that the government is paying attention to ensure the labour laws are enforced.”

Similar labour disputes are ongoing in other African countries, such as the case of Meta’s unlawful dismissal of content s in Kenya. The Kenyan government has also been silent and even partnered with the outsourcing company involved, Sama Source, to give AI jobs to young Kenyans. The Kenyan case was the first time Meta has been subjected to a court of law in the global majority, marking a significant turning point in Africa’s tech labour trajectory. The Kenyan labour court ruled that Meta, a US-based tech company, can be sued in Kenya even though it does not have a physical presence in the country.

It is important to acknowledge that a handful of these tech giants, mostly American companies, wield more financial and technological firepower than a lot of governments across the world. They can overstate their economic value in countries where governments are struggling to hack the youth unemployment problem.

The “creating jobs through tech” song usually brings African governments to the dancefloor and can shield tech companies when they violate the laws. But it relies heavily on PR. Twitter Africa’s presence in Ghana inspired hope for more tech-related jobs for Ghanaians, a message preached by the communications minister. But Twitter Africa had only 11 employees before the closure.

There are potential geopolitical implications to the Ghanaian government sanctioning a global tech company that serves as a conduit for the US’s digital foreign policy, such as a reduction of aid for Ghana’s digital transformation, However, the government of Ghana could have protected the rights of the workers to rearticulate its digital independence especially in an era where African countries are being used as techno-geopolitical pawns by global tech rivals.

Source: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/twitter-broke-ghanas-labour-law-and-the-government-did-nothing/

Please help get this channel to 200 followers:
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaEgF1qFi8xgf1MRmD1W

Please help get this channel to 200 followers:
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaEgF1qFi8xgf1MRmD1W

Good morning!

Please is there a Calgary WhatsApp group for Nigerian?

I’ve been here for 5 months now and desperately need a community of my people.

Hm. Anything below 200K in this economy, no collect.

Meanwhile, please help get this channel to 200 followers:
https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaEgF1qFi8xgf1MRmD1W

A hate campaign is spreading across social media targeting victims and accs of TB Joshua, founder of the Synagogue Church of All Nations (SCOAN), who had come forward with allegations of sexual, physical abuse, fake miracles, in a three-part documentary released in January by BBC Africa, in partnership with openDemocracy.

The abusive content published across YouTube, Facebook, and TikTok violates these social media platforms’ on trolling, harassment, cyberbullying, promotion of hateful ideologies, and more.

These fan s have been distributing old videos, made under duress, showing some of the women who came forward in the BBC documentary, as possessed and mentally unstable. The intention behind sharing these clips appears to have been to discredit the survivors, paint them in a bad light, and create doubt on the integrity of their claims.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/tb-joshua-scoan-youtube-removed-apple-silence-victims/

YouTube has taken down Emmanuel TV, the main channel run by TB Joshua’s megachurch empire, amid allegations the late preacher had for decades groomed and raped multiple former leaders of his ministry.

It comes after openDemocracy identified and reported more than 50 abusive videos amplifying abuse against Joshua’s accs on the video platform.

It is the second time in three years that openDemocracy’s reporting has led to YouTube suspending content from the late preacher’s Synagogue Church of All Nations (SCOAN). In 2021 the Google-owned tech company took down another channel controlled by the church after deciding that it was violating its guidelines due to broadcasts of anti-LGBTIQ hate speech. As a result, the ministry lost the ability to broadcast to its then 1.8 million subscribers.

Joshua died in 2021, but his wife and successor Evelyn Joshua launched a replacement shortly afterwards.

YouTube told openDemocracy: “The flagged channel was terminated for violating our hate speech policies.”

SCOAN did not reply to a request for comment.

YouTube has policies against cyberbullying and harassment, and specifically forbids harassment against survivors of sexual violence.

The BBC World Service in partnership with openDemocracy broadcast earlier this month a three-part documentary in which whistleblowers who were once senior of SCOAN went on the record with allegations of sexual and psychological torture, financial fraud and criminal negligence by Joshua.

As part of the backlash against these abuse survivors, YouTube s promoting SCOAN broadcast and shared archival video footage depicting several of these whistleblowers’ experiences while they were church . These videos, filmed originally by the church’s Emmanuel TV media department, showcased some of the women who participated in the investigative documentary undergoing humiliating rituals and confessing to alleged moral wrongdoing.

The apparent intention behind sharing these clips is to discredit the survivors. Those who spoke with openDemocracy said SCOAN habitually employed psychological manipulation, near starvation and isolation against and that the church videotaped “confessions” as a sort of blackmail. Survivors said these clips were kept to threaten ex-disciples with exposure or reputational damage if they ever decided to make their experiences public.

“The idea was to have so much humiliation filmed on tape that you are both aware of it,” said Ajoke, one of Joshua’s daughters, in an interview with openDemocracy.

“You fear it so much and are constantly shamed by it. So much so that it’s like your voice has been shut down by it.”

YouTube told openDemocracy: “The flagged channel was terminated for violating our hate speech policies.”

SCOAN did not reply to a request for comment.

YouTube has policies against cyberbullying and harassment, and specifically forbids harassment against survivors of sexual violence.

The BBC World Service in partnership with openDemocracy broadcast earlier this month a three-part documentary in which whistleblowers who were once senior of SCOAN went on the record with allegations of sexual and psychological torture, financial fraud and criminal negligence by Joshua.

As part of the backlash against these abuse survivors, YouTube s promoting SCOAN broadcast and shared archival video footage depicting several of these whistleblowers’ experiences while they were church . These videos, filmed originally by the church’s Emmanuel TV media department, showcased some of the women who participated in the investigative documentary undergoing humiliating rituals and confessing to alleged moral wrongdoing.

The apparent intention behind sharing these clips is to discredit the survivors. Those who spoke with openDemocracy said SCOAN habitually employed psychological manipulation, near starvation and isolation against and that the church videotaped “confessions” as a sort of blackmail. Survivors said these clips were kept to threaten ex-disciples with exposure or reputational damage if they ever decided to make their experiences public.

“The idea was to have so much humiliation filmed on tape that you are both aware of it,” said Ajoke, one of Joshua’s daughters, in an interview with openDemocracy.

“You fear it so much and are constantly shamed by it. So much so that it’s like your voice has been shut down by it.”

YouTube told openDemocracy: “The flagged channel was terminated for violating our hate speech policies.”

SCOAN did not reply to a request for comment.

YouTube has policies against cyberbullying and harassment, and specifically forbids harassment against survivors of sexual violence.

The BBC World Service in partnership with openDemocracy broadcast earlier this month a three-part documentary in which whistleblowers who were once senior of SCOAN went on the record with allegations of sexual and psychological torture, financial fraud and criminal negligence by Joshua.

As part of the backlash against these abuse survivors, YouTube s promoting SCOAN broadcast and shared archival video footage depicting several of these whistleblowers’ experiences while they were church . These videos, filmed originally by the church’s Emmanuel TV media department, showcased some of the women who participated in the investigative documentary undergoing humiliating rituals and confessing to alleged moral wrongdoing.

The apparent intention behind sharing these clips is to discredit the survivors. Those who spoke with openDemocracy said SCOAN habitually employed psychological manipulation, near starvation and isolation against and that the church videotaped “confessions” as a sort of blackmail. Survivors said these clips were kept to threaten ex-disciples with exposure or reputational damage if they ever decided to make their experiences public.

“The idea was to have so much humiliation filmed on tape that you are both aware of it,” said Ajoke, one of Joshua’s daughters, in an interview with openDemocracy.

“You fear it so much and are constantly shamed by it. So much so that it’s like your voice has been shut down by it.”

YouTube told openDemocracy: “The flagged channel was terminated for violating our hate speech policies.”

SCOAN did not reply to a request for comment.

YouTube has policies against cyberbullying and harassment, and specifically forbids harassment against survivors of sexual violence.

The BBC World Service in partnership with openDemocracy broadcast earlier this month a three-part documentary in which whistleblowers who were once senior of SCOAN went on the record with allegations of sexual and psychological torture, financial fraud and criminal negligence by Joshua.

As part of the backlash against these abuse survivors, YouTube s promoting SCOAN broadcast and shared archival video footage depicting several of these whistleblowers’ experiences while they were church . These videos, filmed originally by the church’s Emmanuel TV media department, showcased some of the women who participated in the investigative documentary undergoing humiliating rituals and confessing to alleged moral wrongdoing.

Source: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/tb-joshua-emmanuel-tv-taken-down-scoan-youtube-removed/