A senior advocate of Nigeria, Babatunde Ogala, has warned that failure to hold former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai accountable for admitting to tapping the phone of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, could send the wrong message to the public.

Ogala cautioned, “Anyone might wake up one day and appear on national TV to say they want to shoot the president if nothing is done about El-Rufai.”

Speaking during an interview on Arise News, the senior lawyer said El-Rufai’s admission goes beyond the Cybercrimes Act. He noted, “In my opinion, if someone is tapping into communications, invading privacy, or listening in through any method other than what’s allowed by law, it goes beyond the Cyber Crimes Act. It might also break parts of the Data Protection Act.”

He stressed that the seriousness of the matter is not just because the target was the National Security Adviser, adding, “Let’s not just imagine that it’s wrong because it’s the National Security Adviser’s phone, and someone tapping my line or yours breaks the law, and it’s even worse when it’s the National Security Adviser’s phone.”

On the legal process, Ogala explained, “In a criminal case, it’s up to the prosecution to show that the person is guilty with no doubt left. So far today, what we’ve just heard is that charges have been filed. Three charges related to cyber crimes and the Nigerian Communications Act. I haven’t seen any evidence to know what’s inside, but it’s safe to assume the prosecution team did their research before filing these charges.”

He also drew comparisons with other countries to highlight the seriousness of public admissions of criminal acts: “I can’t picture for a moment in that country, where they claim freedom is almost complete, how anyone could say anything they want. I don’t think any American will wake up tomorrow and say we have connected with the official position of the Pentagon and expect the country to ignore it. He would definitely be invited to come and explain things, and even if it’s not clear whether any investigations have taken place, there’s an assumption that some kind of investigation might have happened. And this is an admission on national TV. It’s like me going into a market or Yaba Bus Stop and saying, ‘I just killed someone. ‘ Then you would think that, because you think that, since I have freedom of speech, the police should first check if I actually did the crime before arresting me? When I went to the bus stop to confess a terrible crime?”

He concluded with a warning about separating politics from criminal behavior: “If this is allowed to happen, someone else might say on national TV, ‘I’m going to shoot the President tomorrow. ‘ And if that kind of talk was really political, then I think it would look like taking freedom too far.”