In democratic societies, the right to freedom of expression is sacrosanct, protected by law, and recognized as a fundamental human right. Yet, in Nigeria, cases of government agencies and institutions infringing upon this right continue to emerge with alarming frequency. The recent case of Nurse Osato Edobor, a student at the Delta State College of Nursing Sciences, is yet another troubling example of this overreach.
The school’s query, issued on March 27, 2025, accuses Nurse Edobor of a “malicious act” simply for recording and sharing a video of the First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, at a public event. The document claims that this act- singing along to a song and posting it on TikTok – violates disciplinary rules and could warrant punitive action. But how does recording and sharing a public event constitute a legal or ethical offence? The attempt to frame such an innocent act as misconduct is nothing but an overzealous attempt at censorship—one that threatens to set a dangerous precedent.
Freedom of Expression is a Global Standard
Internationally, freedom of expression is a protected right. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) guarantees that “everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression,” including the right to “seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly ruled against state-backed efforts to stifle public expression, emphasizing that freedom of speech extends to content that may be inconvenient or uncomfortable to those in power.
In the United States, the First Amendment protects individuals from government overreach in matters of speech and expression. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, courts have ruled that public institutions must act proportionally when enforcing rules that affect freedom of speech, ensuring that discipline does not infringe on fundamental rights. Even in African democracies like South Africa and Ghana, legal frameworks exist to protect citizens from arbitrary disciplinary measures for merely expressing themselves in public forums.
If these countries, with advanced legal systems, recognize that individual freedoms must not be sacrificed in the name of institutional discipline, why should Nigeria—a signatory to international human rights treaties—allow such an egregious attack on personal liberties?
The Dangerous Path of Institutional Overreach
The actions of the Delta State College of Nursing Sciences are not just an isolated case of administrative excess; they represent a growing pattern of authoritarianism within Nigeria’s educational and governmental institutions. The reasoning behind this query suggests that public employees and students must adhere to an unspoken culture of silence and servitude—where even harmless actions can be interpreted as subversion.
This is sycophancy in overdrive. The query states that Nurse Edobor was “found to be engaged in a malicious act of recording/singing and posting unofficial response to a song.” Malicious act? How does recording a First Lady’s arrival—at a public event—amount to a punishable offense? The claim that this act violated the student handbook is a textbook example of vague, arbitrary rules being weaponized to stifle personal freedoms.
If this continues unchecked, the consequences could be dire. Public servants and students alike will become increasingly fearful of expressing themselves, even in harmless ways. This fosters an environment where only the most sycophantic voices thrive – stifling creativity, engagement, and even legitimate discourse on national issues.
The query from the school aauthority
National Consequences of Silence
Suppressing free expression in schools and public institutions does more than harm individuals; it erodes trust in governance. When people feel they cannot freely express themselves without facing punitive measures, they withdraw from public discourse. This leads to an environment where constructive criticism, necessary for democracy’s health, is drowned out by fear and compliance.
Moreover, such institutional overreach can foster resentment and disillusionment among the youth. At a time when Nigeria is grappling with brain drain and the mass exodus of skilled professionals, it is reckless to stifle young people’s voices instead of empowering them. Many students and professionals already feel suffocated by a system that values hierarchy over talent. This kind of suppression only accelerates their disconnection from national affairs, pushing them to seek better opportunities in countries that value their rights.
Calling for Sanity and Legal Prudence
The Provost of the Delta State College of Nursing Sciences, Mrs. Evbodaghe Rita Ogonne, must reconsider the institution’s approach to discipline. If the objective is to maintain decorum and professionalism, there are far more reasonable ways to engage students without trampling on their rights. The authorities must understand that public events, especially those involving political figures, are inherently of public interest. Recording and sharing such events should never be considered misconduct.
Moreover, this incident should serve as a wake-up call for Nigerian lawmakers and human rights advocates. There must be clear and enforceable legal protections against arbitrary disciplinary actions by government institutions. Institutions should not be allowed to cite vague rules as an excuse to suppress lawful expression.
The case of Nurse Osato Edobor is not just about one student facing an unfair query—it is about the broader struggle for free speech in Nigeria. If we fail to speak against this growing trend now, we risk normalizing a culture where silence is the only safe option. And in such a culture, democracy itself is at risk. GMTNewsng
