On revenge porn again

Typically, what you do behind closed doors remains behind closed doors. With technology – internet, smartphones, social media – people are sharing more of their private lives and we consume with interest and appropriate emoticons. Sometimes, however, the material that makes it into the public domain was never intended for public consumption. Revenge porn refers to the publication of sexually explicit material (photograph, video) without the consent of the parties depicted in the material.

I have said before that social media is not the place to seek justice when a person has been injured. We may discuss the matter for days or weeks with our moral indignation, but no matter how elegant the turn of words on the issues, they give no remedy to the injured save for, maybe, moral vindication of their rights.


A few weeks ago, a sex video allegedly involving a former beauty queen was released to the public. From the subsequent reaction we can assume that the video was released without the consent of at least one of the parties in the video. So we are all consumed by the morality of the acts portrayed in the video recording of what we assumed was intended for personal/private pleasure and consumption. We also do what we do to victims of sexual assault, which is blame the victim. Why did said victim allow herself to be videotaped? What was said victim involved in such acts in the first place? On and on, so much that the victim is shamed into walking away from vindicating their rights under civil and/or criminal law.

But where would a victim look to for remedy?

Chapter 21a of the Criminal Code covers Obscene Publications. Section 233D provides:

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, any person who, whether for gain or not, distributes or projects any article deemed to be obscene for the purposes of this Chapter, commits an offence punishable on conviction by a fine not exceeding four hundred naira or by imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or by both.

(2) A person shall not be convicted of an offence against this section of this code if he proves that he had not examined the article in respect of which he is charged and had no reasonable cause to suspect that it was such that his publication of it would make him liable to be convicted of an offence against this section of this code.



Read More >>>