Advertisement
Social commentator and lawyer, Dr Daniel Bwala, has said social media outfit, Twitter, deleted a post by the President Muhammadu Buhari, out of malice but failed to erase the provocative posts of leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu.
Bwala made this revelation in an interview The PUNCH.
TheNewsGuru recalls that President Buhari on Tuesday, condemned the attacks on police stations, prisons and offices of the Independent National Electoral Commission, especially in the South-East, warning that those supporting insurgence and violence in the country would be shocked.
Buhari had tweeted, “Many of those misbehaving today are too young to be aware of the destruction and loss of lives that occurred during the Nigerian Civil War. Those of us in the fields for 30 months, who went through the war, will treat them in the language they understand.”
The President’s tweet irritated some persons who felt he was unmoved to have made an analogy of the civil war. His critics then reported the tweet to Twitter and the microblogging site later deleted the post with a comment, “This Tweet violated the Twitter Rules”.
Commenting on the matter, Bwala, a member of the All Progressives Congress said, “The President did not violate Twitter rules. Twitter deleted Buhari’s tweet out of malice. The founder or owner of Twitter is a known and interested party in Nigeria forgetting that you cannot be a jury and a judge in your own case.
“You will recall during the #EndSARS (protests), Jack Dorsey did not only support the #EndSARS protests but also retweeted the means of contributing to the funds used for the protests.
“That incident cannot be treated in isolation; it has never happened anywhere in the world where the owner of Twitter takes part in the protests of private citizens.
“So, tacitly or obviously, he had indicated expression of dissatisfaction towards the President.”
“Kanu has tweeted what has obviously created crisis that has led to so many loss of lives in Nigeria yet his tweets have not been removed. Do you need any further case to establish that the owner of Twitter is an interested party?” the lawyer inquired.
Advertisement
Advertisement