Lai Mohammed Says Twitter Was Suspended for “Becoming Reckless” Under Buhari Administration

Reported by: L. Imafidon | Edited by: Gabriel Osa

Former Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, has offered a renewed and detailed defence of the controversial suspension of Twitter, now known as X, by the Federal Government during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, insisting that the decision was driven solely by concerns over national stability and the platform’s conduct, not by intolerance of criticism or free expression.

Speaking in a recent public engagement, Mohammed said the government acted because Twitter had, in its view, crossed the line from being a neutral platform into what he described as reckless behaviour that posed risks to Nigeria’s security and cohesion. According to him, the suspension was a response to what authorities perceived as the platform’s failure to adequately moderate content capable of inflaming tensions in a country already grappling with deep social, ethnic and security challenges.

The Twitter ban, which took effect in June 2021, followed the deletion of a tweet by President Buhari in which he warned separatist agitators in the South-East that they would be treated “in the language they understand.” While critics at the time framed the suspension as retaliation for that specific action, Mohammed has repeatedly rejected that interpretation, arguing that the tweet’s removal was only the final trigger in a longer chain of unresolved disputes between the Nigerian government and the social media company.

He said the government had become increasingly concerned that Twitter was allowing its platform to be used to spread misinformation, hate speech and incitement, particularly in the context of separatist movements, terrorism and communal violence. Mohammed maintained that in a fragile and diverse country like Nigeria, such unchecked content could have far-reaching and dangerous consequences.

According to the former minister, Nigeria’s engagement with Twitter did not begin with the 2021 suspension. He said government officials had held several discussions with representatives of the company, urging it to take the peculiarities of Nigeria into account and to be more responsive to official concerns about harmful content. In his account, these engagements did not yield the desired changes, leaving the government feeling that decisive action was necessary.

Mohammed stressed that the Buhari administration did not oppose social media platforms or digital expression in principle. He argued that the government’s position was rooted in the belief that technology companies operating in Nigeria must respect the country’s laws and regulatory framework, just as they do in other jurisdictions. In his words, sovereignty and national interest could not be subordinated to the policies of foreign-owned platforms.

The suspension of Twitter lasted for about seven months, during which access to the platform was officially restricted, although many Nigerians continued to use it through virtual private networks. The move sparked widespread domestic and international criticism, with civil society groups, journalists, opposition politicians and global rights organisations accusing the government of stifling free speech and shrinking civic space.

Economists and business groups also raised concerns about the financial impact of the ban, noting that thousands of Nigerians relied on Twitter for digital marketing, customer engagement and international networking. Studies conducted during the suspension estimated significant daily losses to the economy, particularly in the technology and creative sectors.

Despite the backlash, Mohammed said the government believed the long-term benefits of asserting regulatory authority outweighed the short-term costs. He argued that Nigeria could not afford a situation in which powerful platforms operated without accountability while shaping public discourse and political narratives in ways that might destabilise the country.

The standoff eventually ended in January 2022, when the Federal Government announced that Twitter would be allowed to resume operations after agreeing to a set of conditions. These included registering as a business in Nigeria, appointing a country representative, and committing to comply with local laws and content moderation requirements. Twitter later announced the establishment of a Nigerian entity, a move the government presented as validation of its approach.

Mohammed described the outcome as proof that the suspension was not an impulsive or vindictive act, but a calculated policy decision aimed at ensuring responsible digital engagement. He said Nigeria’s action had since influenced conversations in other African countries about regulating big tech companies and asserting digital sovereignty.

Nevertheless, the Twitter ban remains one of the most contentious episodes of the Buhari years. Critics argue that the government failed to demonstrate transparency and proportionality, and that the suspension set a troubling precedent for internet restrictions. Some legal experts also questioned the legal basis of the ban, noting that it was implemented through executive action rather than legislation.

Human rights advocates continue to warn that such measures, even when justified on security grounds, can be abused by future governments to suppress dissent. They argue that stronger institutions, independent regulation and judicial oversight are preferable to outright suspensions of platforms used by millions of citizens.

For Mohammed, however, the narrative of repression misses the broader context in which the decision was taken. He has consistently framed the suspension as a defensive measure in a period marked by insurgency, secessionist rhetoric and widespread misinformation, insisting that government would have been irresponsible to ignore what it saw as a growing threat.

As Nigeria continues to navigate the balance between digital freedom and regulation under subsequent administrations, the debate over the Twitter suspension remains relevant. Mohammed’s comments have reignited discussion about the limits of platform power, the responsibilities of social media companies, and the role of the state in safeguarding national unity in the digital age.

While opinions remain sharply divided, the episode has become a defining case study in Nigeria’s evolving relationship with global technology firms. It underscores the tension between openness and control, and raises enduring questions about how democracies can protect both security and freedom in an increasingly interconnected world.

📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews