By Ahmed Isa
The case of Hamdiyya Sidi, an 18-year-old self-acclaimed activist, facing trial for allegedly cyberbullying and cyberstalking the governor of Sokoto state, Dr. Ahmed Aliyu, has sparked controversy with his opposition and critics, including human rights organizations and sections of the media, framing the situation as an attack on free speech, and accusing the governor of intolerance and high-handedness.
However, a closer examination of the facts reveals a more complex narrative, one that challenges attempts to denigrate Governor Aliyu’s integrity.
Hamdiyya issue became public in November 2024 after she posted video on a social media platform, criticizing Governor Aliyu’s handling of insecurity and the humanitarian crisis in Sokoto State. in the video, the lady called on victims of insecurity in the state to occupy the governor’s office. The call, which was seen as inciting, led to her arrest and prosecution on a charge of “inciting disturbance” under local laws. She was also charged with “using insulting or abusive language” on the person of the governor. Her prosecution was seen as rooted in the belief that her actions crossed legal boundaries, and had the potential to cause a breach of public order and peaceful existence in a region that was already grappling with significant security challenges, including banditry and insurgency.
Sidi’s case has been amplified by Amnesty International, which condemned her arrest as an attempt to suppress dissent. Reports of her abduction in November 2024, subsequent injuries, and disappearance in May 2025 have further fuelled accusations against Gov. Aliyu, with his traducers suggesting his administration orchestrated these events to silence her. However, these claims lack concrete evidence as there is no shred of proof linking the governor directly or remotely to any wrongdoing. Also, the rush to vilify the governor suggests a deliberate effort to overlook critical aspects of the case, including legal accountability, regional security dynamics, and the governor’s broader record.
Hamdiyya Sidi’s trial is not an arbitrary act of vengeance but a legal process grounded in Nigeria’s legal framework. The charges of cyberbullying and cyberstalking stem from the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, Etc.) Act of 2015, which criminalizes the use of digital platforms to harass, intimidate, or incite violence. Her video, which allegedly called for the occupation of the governor’s office, was initially reported to Police authorities by local authorities, including the Village Head of Sabon Birnin Daji. In his report, the Village Head complained that her video and call was inciting people to violence in a volatile region. Given Sokoto’s ongoing struggles with banditry and insecurity, such actions could destabilize an already fragile environment. This is seen as justification for the prosecution of the matter by the Police.
Opposition figures and critics in Sokoto argue that the charges infringe on Sidi’s right to free expression. However, freedom of speech is not absolute, even in democratic societies. The Nigerian Constitution and international human rights law permit restrictions on speech that incites violence or disrupts public peace and order. Sidi’s call for the occupation of government house could reasonably be interpreted as crossing the limits of freedom. Moreover, her arrest was followed by due process as she was granted bail, and her case has proceeded through the courts, with adjournments to ensure fair hearings. The trial had been jeopardised by claims that a Sokoto court had sentenced her to “12 strokes of the cane, two years imprisonment, or a fine of N50,000.” These allegations were debunked by her lawyer, Abba Hikima, confirming that no such ruling had been made as of April 2025. However, it suggests that there is a deliberate attempt by some to sensationalize the case and misrepresent the judicial process to tarnish Governor Aliyu’s reputation.
Also, the narrative portraying Governor Aliyu as an intolerant leader intent on silencing critics lacks substantiated evidence. Amnesty International and other groups, which are used to accused Aliyu of orchestrating threats against Sidi and her lawyer, had cited incidents of stalking and intimidation. Yet, these allegations rely heavily on unverified claims, such as one which claimed “confrontations by individuals claiming to be intelligence agents.” These allegations have passed without concrete proof linking them to the governor or his administration. Also, the abduction of Sidi in November 2024, while deeply concerning, occurred in a region plagued by banditry, and there is no definitive evidence that it was state-sponsored. Similarly, her disappearance in May 2025 and subsequent discovery in a Zamfara hospital, with severe injuries, have been attributed to unknown assailants, not directly to Aliyu’s government.
The rush to blame Aliyu ignores the broader context of Sokoto’s security challenges. The state is beset by banditry, kidnapping, and insurgency, including spill over from Boko Haram’s resurgence in Borno State. The governor’s primary responsibility is to maintain stability, and any perceived incitement could exacerbate these issues. People like Sidi, while entitled to voice concerns, must operate within legal boundaries to avoid inflaming tensions. The state’s response to her actions, far from being a personal vendetta, reflects a broader effort to uphold law and order in a precarious environment.
To fully assess the attempt to denigrate Aliyu’s integrity, it is essential to examine his governance record, which paints a picture of a leader committed to public welfare. Since assuming office in May 2023, Aliyu has implemented significant initiatives to address Sokoto’s challenges. He established the Sokoto State Community Guards Corps to bolster local security, complementing federal efforts to combat banditry. Additionally, his administration has prioritized economic empowerment through soft grants and skill acquisition programmes, aimed at reducing unemployment and fostering self-reliance among the youth. These efforts have contributed to fiscal prudence and enabled infrastructural development without accumulating debt, a rarity in Nigerian governance system.
Aliyu’s achievements were recognized when he received the “Governor of the Year” award from The Sun on March 1, 2025, for his transformative leadership across sectors. His commitment to staying in Sokoto and engaging directly with constituents, and addressing their needs contrasts sharply with the image of an aloof or authoritarian leader. Opposition politicians who focus solely on the Sidi case overlook these accomplishments, selectively highlighting one incident to construct a narrative of repression.
The controversy surrounding Sidi’s case cannot be divorced from Nigeria’s polarized political landscape. Aliyu, a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC), faces opposition from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), which previously governed Sokoto under Aminu Tambuwal. Some sources suggest that Sidi’s actions were supported by PDP operatives seeking to use it to undermine Aliyu’s administration. These claims highlight the possibility that the case is being exploited for political gain. The opposition’s alleged backing of Sidi’s activism, combined with amplified media narratives, may be part of a broader strategy to discredit Aliyu’s governance achievements.
This political dimension is further evidenced by the rapid spread of unverified claims about Sidi’s sentencing, which her lawyer debunked. The circulation of such misinformation on platforms like X and Facebook suggests a coordinated effort to inflame public sentiment against Gov. Aliyu. Rather than addressing the substantive issues of governance and security, opposition have seized on Sidi’s case to paint Aliyu as a tyrant. In doing this, they deliberately ignore the complexities of governing a state under siege.
The accusation that Aliyu is intolerant of dissent is rendered meaningless by the lack of a broader pattern of suppression. Unlike some Nigerian leaders who have faced criticism for widespread crackdowns, there is no evidence of Gov. Aliyu systematically targeting his critics beyond the Sidi case. Even in Sidi’s case, the legal process has been transparent, with court adjournments and bail provisions indicating adherence to due process.
Furthermore, Aliyu’s administration has not issued official statements condemning Sidi or her lawyer, suggesting restraint rather than aggression.
Amnesty International’s call for an investigation into threats against Sidi and her lawyer is valid, but it does not automatically implicate Aliyu. The governor operates within a complex security environment where non-state actors, including bandits and political operatives, could be responsible for such incidents. Attributing every threat to Aliyu without evidence is unfair and detracts from the need for a thorough, impartial investigation.
*Isa writes from Abuja