Education
Virtual World is a Lawless Arena — Justice Omolaye-Ajileye Warns at FUOYE Lecture
By Joseph Sunday
A former High Court Judge and Visiting Professor at the National Open University, Hon. Justice Alaba Omolaye-Ajileye, has described the virtual world as a “lawless arena” that defies conventional policing, warning that Nigeria’s criminal laws must urgently evolve to tackle intimidation, threats and defamation committed in cyberspace.
Justice Omolaye-Ajileye gave the warning on Thursday, September 8, 2026, while delivering a paper titled, “Criminal Intimidation in the Digital Age: Legal Challenges and Regulation of Online Speech in Nigeria,” at the Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Lecture Series for Law Students of the Federal University Oye-Ekiti, FUOYE, Ekiti State.
The lecture, hosted by the Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Joshua Olalekan Ogunwole, was instituted by the Distinguished Visiting Professor of Law Practice at the university and legal icon, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN.
In his opening remarks, Justice Omolaye-Ajileye paid glowing tribute to Chief Olanipekun, who he said nurtured him “from legal infancy to professional maturity.”
The jurist, renowned for his expertise in electronic evidence, charged law students to turn their current limitations into future strengths, sharing his personal journey from “near-total ignorance” to competence and relevance in the field through vision, discipline and resilience.
According to him, modern life must be understood across three interconnected realms — physical, spiritual and virtual. While traditional law developed to regulate the physical realm, the virtual realm — created by computers, the internet, smartphones and artificial intelligence — has extended human activity into a technologically created environment where consequences are very real.
“The virtual world is borderless. It is highly decentralized, which allows all kinds of criminals to operate with reckless abandon across jurisdictions,” he said.
He noted that anonymity, pseudonyms, encrypted platforms and the absence of a single universal law enforcement authority make detection, investigation and prosecution of online crimes more complex than in the physical world.
Tracing the law, the former judge explained that under Section 96 of the Penal Code of the FCT, criminal intimidation involves threatening another person with injury to his person, reputation or property, with the intention of causing alarm or compelling him to act or refrain from acting.
Citing the Supreme Court decision in Chidozie v. C.O.P (2018), he said the essential elements are a threat, threatened injury and intention. The offence becomes aggravated under Section 397(b) when it involves threats to cause death, grievous hurt, destroy property by fire, or impute unchastity to a woman — punishable by up to seven years imprisonment.
Its cyber equivalent, he said, is cyberstalking under Section 24(2) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015, as amended in 2024.
He explained that the 2024 amendment narrowed the controversial Section 24(1), which previously criminalised messages that were “grossly offensive, pornographic, indecent, obscene or menacing” or false messages sent to cause annoyance and anxiety.
Under the amended Act, Section 24(1)(a) now covers pornographic messages, while Section 24(1)(b) covers messages known to be false and sent to cause breakdown of law and order or pose a threat to life. The penalty remains up to N7 million fine, three years imprisonment, or both.
Justice Omolaye-Ajileye issued a stern warning to social media users about republication.
“The phrase ‘causes such messages to be sent’ extends liability beyond the original author. It may encompass a person who deliberately forwards, republishes or arranges for transmission of the prohibited message,” he said.
Illustrating with case scenarios, he noted that if A writes a defamatory post, B reposts it, C screenshots it to Instagram, D repeats it on TikTok and E shares it to a 200-member WhatsApp group, all have published in the eyes of the law.
“Merely writing ‘I did not originate the story; I only reposted it,’ does not necessarily resolve liability,” he stressed.
Using a second scenario of a false X post accusing a lecturer of collecting money to pass students, which garnered 500,000 views in 24 hours, he said technology has not changed the basic nature of defamation, but has dramatically changed its medium, speed and audience, intensifying its psychological and coercive impact.
At the same time, he said technology plays a dual role — as an instrument of crime and as a source of electronic evidence that leaves digital footprints capable of identifying origin, content and timing.
He concluded that the challenge for Nigeria is to develop a jurisprudence that understands technology without abandoning fundamental principles — protecting people from credible threats while preserving freedom of expression.
“Before sharing a message, we should consider its truth, its purpose and its likely consequences. Our task is to ensure that the digital space remains a place where people can speak freely, participate responsibly, and live without fear,” he said.