Human rights lawyer Deji Adeyanju has criticized the Department of State Services (DSS) for issuing threats against Nigerians planning to protest on Wednesday, June 12, in response to the worsening economic situation in the country.
In a statement to journalists, Adeyanju condemned the remarks made by Peter Afunanya, the DSS Director of Public Relations & Strategic Communications, calling them an affront to democratic values. He emphasized that such actions would be met with legal resistance.
Adeyanju urged the DSS to exercise caution and not undermine the nation’s democratic principles. He highlighted the DSS’s duty to maintain national security but stressed that freedom of expression and assembly are constitutional rights that must be upheld.
“I am compelled to respond to the DSS’s public statement on the planned protests scheduled for June 12, 2024, concerning the worsening economic conditions of the Nigerian masses,” Adeyanju stated. “While the DSS has the responsibility to maintain national security, it is essential to recognize that freedom of expression and assembly are fundamental rights enshrined in our constitution. These rights are the bedrock of democracy, and any attempt to suppress them is a threat to our democratic values and will be resisted through every available legal means.”
He pointed out the irony of the current administration, led by President Tinubu, which had benefited from protests and demonstrations to gain power, now attempting to suppress the same rights.
“I urge the DSS and the Federal Government to respect citizens’ rights to peaceful assembly and expression. Rather than threatening protesters, they should focus on addressing bandits, terrorists, and kidnappers who are terrorizing Nigerians unchallenged,” Adeyanju added.
He called on all Nigerians to exercise their rights peacefully and responsibly, and urged security agencies to protect protesters and ensure their safety.
Previously, the DSS had issued a statement warning Nigerians against participating in the planned protests, labeling them as disgruntled elements aiming to cause a breakdown of law and order. This statement was seen as a direct threat to the fundamental human rights of freedom of expression and assembly as stipulated in Sections 39 and 40 of the 1999 constitution, as amended.
