By Miskoom Michael Tsentwam
In the last few days, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has taken to X to comment on the arraignment of Mr. Gabriel Tsenyen, former Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Shendam Branch, by the State Security Service under the Cybercrimes Act.
With due respect, this intervention is premature, selective and unhelpful. It risks turning a straightforward criminal charge into a media circus.
According to court documents in Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/317/2026, Mr. Tsenyen is facing a four-count charge.
The SSS alleges that on or about 15 May 2026, he used the Ngootuguit Local Community WhatsApp platform to publish that the entire community was plotting to eliminate him.
The prosecution’s case is that he knew the allegation to be false and made the publication with intent to cause enmity, hatred, ill will and needless anxiety. The matter was filed on 2 June 2026 and is now before the Federal High Court in Abuja.
Those are the facts the court will determine. Not X.
However, on 24 June, Prof. Odinkalu described the charges as “difficult to take seriously.” He also linked this prosecution to a 2025 land dispute in Shendam and alleged “abuse of power.” With respect, this conflation is misleading.
A civil land dispute pending before the Plateau State High Court is one matter. A criminal charge arising from a public WhatsApp post is another.
The Cybercrimes Act, 2015 specifically addresses the use of electronic platforms to spread information known to be false and capable of causing public harm. Freedom of expression does not include the freedom to make false allegations that can inflame a community.
If Mr. Tsenyen believes he is innocent, the proper forum is the courtroom not a thread on X. If Prof. Odinkalu believes the law is being misapplied, the proper response is legal argument before the judge not prejudicial commentary online.
The attempt to link this prosecution to the family of the President of the Court of Appeal and to a planned Court of Appeal anniversary sitting in Plateau State is unfortunate.
It imputes motive without proof and drags the judiciary into a matter that should be decided on evidence.
It also does a disservice to Ngootugu’ut. This is a peaceful community currently seeing real development: roads and infrastructure that our people are celebrating. We do not need outsiders importing “negative energy” and framing a local dispute as a national conspiracy.
Mr. Tsenyen is a son of Ngootugu’ut and deserves due process. So does the community he accused. The court will weigh the evidence and decide.
Prof. Odinkalu has spent years as a public voice on human rights. That role comes with responsibility. Commenting on a pending criminal case, alleging abuse without evidence in court and turning it into a personal crusade undermines the very rule of law he claims to defend.
Age and experience should counsel restraint. The African tradition expects elders and professionals to be statesmen not town criers for one side in a case.
Moreso, a man who was eased out of office for his conduct should not be the one throwing stones at others.
When someone has questions about their own stewardship, credibility matters. It becomes difficult to take lectures on due process, honour and restraint from such a person.
We in Ngootugu’ut and across Shendam know Mr Tsenyen very well. He has over the years instituted cases against his own people for no just cause. We are familiar with his antics.
We therefore ask for one thing: let the court do its work. Let the DSS present its evidence. Let the defense respond.
Prof. Odinkalu should refrain from commentary that pre-judges the case and inflames passions. Nigeria is better served when senior lawyers respect process over publicity.
The law, not social media will determine the truth in FHC/ABJ/CR/317/2026.
Miskoom Tsentwam writes from Shendam, Plateau State.
