REPORT OF THE PUBLIC SENSITIZATION ON DANGEROUS SPEEECH FOR THE SOUTH EAST REGION HELD ON THE 29th OF OCTOBER 2016 AT HOTEL CORDIAL ENUGU

The programme started at around 11:00, it was started late because it was sanitation day in Enugu state. The participants were drawn from students, youth, women group, traditional titled holders, journalists and Civil Society Organizations.

It started with self-introduction by the participants, welcome remarks by Isah Garba, who welcomed the participants to the programme and took them through the background of the CITAD peace project in general, and specifically the monitoring and countering of hate and dangerous speech, its objectives, goals and activities. He also made the participants to know that the Enugu progarmme is the third in the series of the regional sensitization programmes that CITAD is conducting in the country with one programme in each of the six regions in the country, started from Damaturuin Yobe state for the Northeast and Jos in Plateau state for the North Central.

The next was a presentation on understanding Dangerous Speech, which was also taken by Isah Garba and he led the participants to define hate speech with specific focus on the contextual working definition, which is summarized to be  regarded as dangerous speech any speech act that is aimed at inciting the audience to denigrate against people others of the basis of ethnicity, religion, gender, geography and any other socially conceived parameter with the purpose of marginalizing them or placing them at some disadvantage that is contrary to the provisions of the universal declaration on human rights as well as the international covenants on rights of the people. This does not include the peculiar joking relations that exist in some communities, practiced between two or more ethnic/linguistic groups that have historically been used as a conflict resolution mechanism.

Another area torched in the presentation is the transition or difference between hate speech and dangerous speech. Dangerous speech is considered as speech that contains call to action such as, kill, loot, beat, discriminate, evict or riot. The participants were also made to understand that for any speech to be considered worthy for categorizing as hate speech, the speakers influence and position has be look into, the audience’s possibility of reacting to the speech and the level of the speakers influence on the audience plus the medium of disseminating the speech considering manipulation of the medium by the speaker and level of frequent repetition of the speech.

Ibrahim Nuhu took the second presentation which is Strategies of Countering Dangerous speech. He first lead the participants to appreciate the fact that for anybody to effectively counter hate speech ne needs to have full knowledge of what hate speech is. The participants were taken through varies ways o countering dangerous speech including means of preempting methodologies.

During the general discussions participants unanimously agreed on the existence of so many hate speeches cutting across religion, region and ethnicity, some as a result of misconceptions, others deliberate by either politicians or some so called religious leaders.

They also commended CITAD and MacArthur foundation for planning to sensitized the populous on this menaces and teaching ways of countering them to curb violence and promote peaceful coexistence in the country. It was also recommended that these sensitizations should be started from the scratch through catching children young right from the primary and secondary schools level since most of the distortions and inculcation of hatred among the people is mostly started there. The programme was closed at around 5:00pm and participants left for the various destinations.

Again, CITAD Warns: Hate Speech Increasing In Nigeria

The  Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD) has issued another warning to Nigerians about  the dangers of hate speech.

At a briefing on its latest research in Kano,CITAD noted that “One is that in July we recorded more hate speech than in June. This means that hate speech is increasing in the country. Secondly as we observed last month, this month also the bulk of the items are relate to ethnicity or religion. We also see the oversimplification of comet process such as rural banditry which is reduced to a conflict between herders and farmers, but which in the spread of hate either speech is cast as the attempt by Muslims to kill non-Muslim people especially in the south east.”

Read excerpts of  the text of Press Briefing on Hate Speech for the Month of June Addressed By Isah Garba, Senior Programmes Officer (Peace and Conflicts), Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD) On July 27, 2016, Kano below


“…
I welcome you to the second of our monthly media briefing on hate speech. We will recall that CITAD has with support of our partners, notably the Nigeria Stability and Reconciliation Programme (NSRP) of DFID and the MacArthur Foundation been undertaking the monitoring and countering of hate speech online as part of the effort to preempt and prevent outbreak of violence that is ignited through the spread of hate and dangerous speech in the society.  Starting from last month, we commenced a month media briefing so as to draw attention to key and salient issues that we observe in the month.

This month we are particularly worried that with the increasing acrimonious campaign that is rolling up over the bye election for the member representing Minjibir constituency in the Kano State. We think it is necessary for all stakeholders to come to agreement on what needs to be done to prevent the reoccurrence of violence that terminated the first attempt at the bye election some weeks back.

The Results from July Monitoring Activates
Between June and July of this year; our monitors have documented 779 hate speech items. This brings the total of generated hate speech monitored to 1490 these are categorized as follows:
1. Access to resource related hate speech 82 items
2. Biafran agitation – 192 items
3. Terror recruitment – 27 items
4. Election related 25 items
5. Religious – 618 items
6. Ethnicity – 570 items

Observations

Two facts need to be drawn from this. One is that in July we recorded more hate speech than in June. This means that hate speech is increasing in the country. Secondly as we observed last month, this month also the bulk of the items are relate to ethnicity or religion. We also see the oversimplification of comet process such as rural banditry which is reduced to a conflict between herders and farmers, but which in the spread of hate either speech is cast as the attempt by Muslims to kill non-Muslim people especially in the south east.

With respect to our immediate environment there is repeated use of the Mu hadu a Minjibir and ‘Dan halalar ka fasa” both of which are threats of violence as different political factions prepare for the bye election.

The languages that people are using are clearly language that even the most rapid inflammatory print newspaper would not use. This means that the anonymity and the sense of freedom of the social media is a fact in the generation and circulation of hate speech. Yet as our data, shown over 80% of the items are English. This means that the people are school educated.

An analysis shows that there are four keys underlying the spread of hate speech in the country. These include:

  1. The perception that the Government headed by a Hausa Fulani Muslim north is discriminating against the Igbos
  2. The counter perception that sections of the country were not happy with the outcome of the election and continuing the election contest by making it difficult for the government to settle
  3. The fact that some propel who do not want the anti-corruption to be agenda of the government and will want do everything to scuttle it
  4. The increased economic hardship that has resulted following the collapse of national earnings and some decision of the government

In this situation, government has a responsibility to speak out to its citizens to try to explain things so that some with some others interest do not use the absence of credible information from government to manipulate opinion of the people. We note that in our broad categories of hate and dangerous speech, rumour is a key component. Rumour strives in the void where information is lacking or in the context of opacity where government officials horde information. In the items that we have captured we see number of rumours, some which could easily lead to confusion. Government has the onerous duty to make sure that rumour is not given free reigns by absent of substantive information from its officials.

 

Recommendations

KANO POLITICS

  1. Politicians should not make the Minjibir election as avenue for revenging or paying back the grievances they have against each other
  2. Politicians should make sure they preach for free and fair electoral participation to their supporters
  3. The candidates contesting the elections and their parties should emulate from the presidential candidates of the 2015 election particularly the then president for on knowing that he lost the election called to congratulate his opponent who won. This simple but difficult action not only makes him a hero in the eyes of the democrats but also saved the country from possible disintegration and blood birth.
  4. The Sojojin Baka of all sections of the both intra and inter parties who serve as stimulants to the key actors in the process should know that  as they speak on the air it goes directly to heterogeneous audience that may have different perception and interpretation and finally act differently. In view of this they should guard their utterances and speak in the way that will not promote violence. Rather as they advocate for votes for those they promote they should also advocate for peace as the people they support can only be in office if there is peace, the election can only be conclusive and declared if peacefully conducted and concluded.
  5. The security operatives in the state should be more vigilant and have their ears to the ground to snipe any possible violence and address early warning signs to avoid violence occurrence. In addition they should keep pace with what is going in the media and other political scenes so as to call order any person or group that is about to derail.
  6. The electoral commission should try as much as it can keep to the tenet of the commission in conducting the election and sensitize it adhoc staff on the need to be objective in all the process and the dangers attached to acting contrary
  7. The general public especially those in the constituency, should learn from the sad experience of cancelled April election and fear the possibility of them not having a representative in the house should this by election went violence and declared inconclusive by INEC should INEC keep to its words that if the election is not successfully concluded the constituency will remain without a representative, to avid that they should coordinate themselves and not allow any external person to mar the future of their constituency.
  8. The Media on the other hand should keep to the ethic of the profession as they report political activities or run political programmes especially the live programmes
Also On NewsdiaryOnline
  2015: Imposition Of Wike As Flag-Bearer, A Continuation Of PDP’s War –Rivers APC

Government 

Since the last press conference, we have not seen government taking serious steps to address some the underlying factors that are leading to the spread of hate speech. In this connection, we would like to repeat the same call that we made earlier, that is:

  1. The Federal Government should step efforts promoting inclusive dialogues with a view to arriving at national consensus on national issues
  2. The Federal Government should hasten to roll out programmes that will address the hardship that citizens are experiencing which are providing the fertile space for the generation and circulation of hate speech
  3. Governments at all levels should promote inclusivity in access to decision making processes and to the benefits of governance programmes
  4. Governments should promote transparency and openness in the conduct of government and its officials so that citizens are carried along
  5. Governments should provide adequate information on all decisions taken so that the true circumstances of such decisions are understood by all

Religious and Ethnic Leaders

  1. They should refrain from using inciting language and caution their followers from using hate speech to voice their grievances
  2. That religious and community leaders must always condemn hate speech where it is made
  3. That religious and community leaders should enlighten the public against hate and dangerous speech
  4. That at all times, they should promote dialogue and peaceful resolution of conflicts and support the promotion of inclusivity in all governance programmes and activities at all levels

Conclusion                                                                                                  

As a community we seem to close our eyes and assume that we do not see and hear hate speech. Yet the online channels that we youth engage with are becoming saturated with hate and dangerous speech.  This has two major implications. One is that youth who are most impressionable and  are still grappling with socialization issues are likely to get the wrong messages from this. Second we know that youth are often the major combatants in conflicts. That they are,kyr most likely to be mobilized for conflicts purposes are also the ones coming into contact with various shade of hate speech which with explicit call to action that includes not just discrimination of but killings also can spell danger to our country. We therefore urge people community leaders and indeed all people of influence to join the campaign against hate speech.

In this connection, we also call on the join to join the campaign by providing venue for enlightening and educating people against hate speech and also by deliberately refusing to provide space for the spread of hate speech and messages in their medium.

 

http://newsdiaryonline.com/citad-warns-hate-speech-increasing-nigeria/

Hate Speech: ‘Nigerians Becoming Ethnically, Religiously Insensitive’, CITAD Warns

Kano-based  Centre For Information Technology And Development (CITAD) has warned that despite the efforts to curb hate or dangerous speech during the 2015 elections, Nigerians appear to have now  become ‘ethnically and religiously insensitive or even intolerant.’

The Centre’s finding were disclosed at a press briefing on Friday in Kano by Isa Garba, its Senior Programmes Officer (Peace and conflicts) .Analysing the Centre’s findings between May and June this year ,Garba said “It is seen that the two major sources of hate speech in the period are religion and ethnicity. In fact, the two contribute about 94% of the items captured. This means that Nigerians are becoming ethnically and religiously insensitive, or even intolerant. The co-occurrence of these to a polity that is multi-ethnic and multi-religious can very dangerous as past ethno-religious violent conflicts have shown.”

For a proper appreciation of the issues , we publish below excerpts of CITAD’s  briefing:

 

TEXT OF PRESS BRIEFING ON HATE SPEECH FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE ADDRESSED BY ISAH GARBA, SENIOR PROGRAMMES OFFICER (PEACE AND CONFLICTS), CENTRE FOR INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND DEVELOPMENT (CITAD) ON JUNE 30, 2016, KANO

Distinguished members of the press, I will like on behalf of the Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD) to welcome you to this conference, the first of its series of monthly press briefing on our hate and dangerous Speech Monitoring and Countering Projects that we will be holding. The purpose of the press briefing is to share with public issues of concern that we observe over the month and suggest cause of action that will mitigate these issues of concern.
Dangerous or hate speech has been defined as speech act that denigrates people on the basis of their membership to a group, such as an ethnic or religious group that has a reasonable chance of catalyzing or amplifying violence by one group against another, given the circumstances in which it is made or disseminated. A Speech act in this context includes any form of expression, including images such as drawings or photographs, dance, films, cartoons, etc
While hate speech has been commonly used, there has over the years been an effort to differentiate between hate and dangerous speech, the former as a collection of all forms of inflammatory speech practices while dangerous speech is reserved for that specific category that leads to itself to inciting people to act or accept violence against others as normal. This distinction is necessary to allow for monitoring of speech that is capable of leading to violence.
In this context, it is also important to concretely specify what qualifies for hate/dangerous speech within the Nigerian context. In our context, we regard as dangerous speech any speech act that is aimed at inciting the audience to denigrate against people others of the basis of ethnicity, religion, gender, geography and any other socially conceived parameter with the purpose of marginalizing them or placing them at some disadvantage that is contrary to the provisions of the universal declaration on human rights as well as the international covenants on rights of the people. This does not include the peculiar joking relations that exist in some communities, practiced between two or more ethnic/linguistic groups that have historically been used as a conflict resolution mechanism. Substantively, we see dangerous/hate speech in the Nigerian context as speech act that:
1. Insults people for their religion
2. Abuses people for their ethnic or linguistic affiliation
3. Expresses contempt against people because of their place of origin
4. Disparages or intimidates women or girls because of their gender
5. Condones discriminatory assertions against people living with disability
6. Abuses or desecrates symbols of cultural or religious practices
7. Denigrates or otherwise ridicules traditional or cultural institutions of other people
8. Deliberate spread falsehood or rumours that demeans or maligns or otherwise ostracizes other people on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender or place of origin for the accident of one form of disability or the other

Hate speech is major driver of violent conflicts as experiences in several countries have shown. Peace building efforts therefore have always included efforts to both reduce the circulation of hate speech and neutralize the likely impact of these that circulate. This is done through monitoring and countering programmes such as we do.
Nigeria is not immune to hate speech. In fact while from our work we found that after the peace accord was signed between the presidential candidates in the 2015 general elections there was reduction in hate speech, over the last months there has been a rise of volume of hate and dangerous speech in the country.
The Results from June
Between May and June of this year, our monitors have documented 393 hate speech items. These items are categorized as follows:
1. Access to resource related hate speech- 31items
2. Biafran agitation – 90 items
3. Terror recruitment – 16 items
4. Election related 13 items
5. Religious – 168 items
6. Ethnicity – 198 items

It is seen that the two major sources of hate speech in the period are religion and ethnicity. In fact, the two contribute about 94% of the items captured. This means that Nigerians are becoming ethnically and religiously insensitive, or even intolerant. The co-occurrence of these to a polity that is multi-ethnic and multi-religious can very dangerous as past ethno-religious violent conflicts have shown.
We are particularly horrified by some of the messages that people peddle, clearly calling for the killings of others, dehumanizing and demonizing others to create the condition for people to act the call to action. The dynamics of hate speech is that other gets provoked and retaliate in same manner and before you know it, some people take the action step to implement the specified call to action contained in the hate messages.
Recommendations
Many of the hate speech items rise from perceptions associated with action or inaction of government. Others are located within the complex contest of space and resources by various ethnic groups in the country. Not least is also the rise of new violent groups such as the Niger Delta Avengers as well as the continuing Biafran agitation. We feel that the country more than any other time is called upon to manage its diversity. This means that open up spaces for genuine conversation towards promoting national understanding is needed. Specifically, we would to call on
Government
1. The Federal Government should step efforts promoting inclusive dialogues with a view to arriving at national consensus on national issues
2. The Federal Government should hasten to roll out programmes that will address the hardship that citizens are experiencing which are providing the fertile space for the generation and circulation of hate speech
3. Governments at all levels should promote inclusivity in access to decision making processes and to the benefits of governance programmes
4. Governments should promote transparency and openness in the conduct of government and its officials so that citizens are carried along
5. Governments should provide adequate information on all decisions taken so that the true circumstances of such decisions are understood by all

Also On NewsdiaryOnline
  Educating Children:The Main Task of a Teacher and the Inherited Burden from Parents

Religious and Ethnic Leaders
1. They should refrain from using inciting language and caution their followers from using hate speech to voice their grievances
2. That religious and community leaders must always condemn hate speech where it is made
3. That religious and community leaders should enlighten the public against hate and dangerous speech
4. That at all times, they should promote dialogue and peaceful resolution of conflicts and support the promotion of inclusivity in all governance programmes and activities at all levels

Individuals
Individuals must not only refrain from engaging in hate speech but must also refuse to be provoked by it. Once people do not react to hate speech, it loses its capacity to catalyze violence. We urge people to be valiant and to report hate speech rather than act on it.

 

http://newsdiaryonline.com/hate-speech-nigerians-becoming-ethnically-religiously-insensitive-citad-warns/