Section 24, before and after: what the 2024 amendment to the Cybercrimes Act actually changed

This is a document piece. It presents the statutory text of section 24 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act as enacted in 2015 and as amended in 2024, and the court record that sits between the two. It does not argue a case. Where it relies on a party to the litigation for the chronology, it says so.

The 2015 text

The Act was gazetted on 18 May 2015 as Act No. 17 (Official Gazette No. 82, Vol. 102) with commencement on 15 May 2015. Section 24 is headed “Cyberstalking”. Its first subsection, as enacted, read:

Any person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer systems or network that – (a) is grossly offensive, pornographic or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character or causes any such message or matter to be so sent … commits an offence under this Act and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not more than ₦7,000,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of not more than 3 years or to both such fine and imprisonment.

The operative word was “offensive”. The Act did not define it.

The challenge

Per the account of Olumide Babalola, who acted for the applicants:

• 23 May 2016Originating summons filed at the Federal High Court, Lagos, seeking a declaration that s.24 violates freedom of speech.
• 20 Jan 2017Suit struck out by Idris J.
• 1 Jun 2018Appeal struck out by the Court of Appeal (reported as Inc. Trustees of Paradigm Initiative v Attorney General of the Federation (2018) LPELR-46655(CA)). Georgewill JCA, in a separate observation, urged the National Assembly to subject s.38 data-release powers to court order.
• 10 Jul 2020ECOWAS Community Court of Justice, in Inc. Trustees of Laws and Rights Awareness Initiative v Federal Republic of Nigeria (ECW/CCJ/JUD/16/20), holds that s.24 violates Article 9(2) of the African Charter and Article 19(3) of the ICCPR, and orders Nigeria to repeal or amend it.
• 28 Feb 2024Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act signed into law.

A Supreme Court appeal, filed in 2019, had not been listed for hearing at the time of Babalola’s account.

The 2024 text

The Amendment Act occupies pages 49 to 55 of the consolidated edition published by the Office of the National Security Adviser. The replacement subsection, as quoted by Babalola and consistent with the amendment’s published text, reads:

Any person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer systems or network that – (a) is pornographic; or (b) he knows to be false, for the purpose of causing a breakdown of law and order, posing a threat to life, or causing such message to be sent … commits an offence under this Act and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not more than ₦7,000,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of not more than 3 years or to both such fine and imprisonment.

What changed, and what did not

	2015	2024
Trigger	“grossly offensive, pornographic or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character”	“pornographic”, or a message the sender “knows to be false” sent to cause a breakdown of law and order or pose a threat to life
Mental element	knowingly or intentionally sends	knowingly or intentionally sends, and knows the message to be false
Penalty	up to ₦7,000,000 and/or 3 years	unchanged

Two things follow from the text alone.

First, “offensive” is gone. A message can no longer be an offence under s.24(1) because someone found it offensive, indecent or menacing.

Second, the new offence turns on falsity and knowledge. The prosecution has to show the sender knew the message was false and sent it for one of two purposes. For a reporter, that moves the fight onto the record: what was known, when, and what it was published for. It is the reason this site prints its sources under every claim.

The same Amendment Act rewrote section 38: service providers must keep traffic data and subscriber information for two years, “in accordance with the provision of the Nigeria Data Protection Act”.

What this piece does not say

It does not say the amended section is harmless; it does not say how courts have applied it since 2024; and it does not say what the pending Supreme Court appeal will do. Those are separate pieces, and they need separate receipts.