Collaborators: newoal

Truth in the Age of Deepfakes: Legal Frontiers Against Digital Deception and Image Abuse

INTRODUCTION

In today’s digital era, truth competes with advanced technology. Artificial intelligence (AI) can now generate highly realistic videos, images, and audio that convincingly imitate real people. These “deepfakes” raise serious concerns about information integrity, privacy, identity protection, and national stability. In Nigeria, where social media drives political discourse and news consumption, the risks are immediate.

This article examines how Nigerian law can confront the emerging challenge of deepfakes. It explains its impact, reviews the current legal framework on cybercrime, privacy, and image rights, identifies enforcement gaps, and highlights global best practices that could guide Nigerian reform.

THE THREATS DEEPFAKE POSES

Nigeria’s high social media penetration and expanding digital economy create fertile ground for deepfake misuse. Three major categories of harm are especially relevant:

  1. Political Disinformation:  Deepfakes are increasingly used to distort political narratives. During and after the 2023 elections, fact-checkers identified digitally altered videos targeting candidates. In May 2025, for example, a fabricated clip of Peter Obi delivering a speech to Burkina Faso’s leader circulated widely before being debunked.[1] Such content undermines democratic processes and erodes confidence in legitimate information sources.
  2. Financial and Identity Fraud: AI-generated audio and video now enable criminals to impersonate trusted individuals with alarming accuracy.[2]  In Nigeria, the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON) has warned about a surge of AI-generated advertisements using the likenesses of notable personalities to market fraudulent products and services. These tactics exploit public trust and expose consumers to financial loss.[3]
  3. Sexual Exploitation (Non-Consensual Imagery): Deepfake technology can create synthetic pornography of real individuals without their consent, a digital form of revenge porn. Worldwide, high percentage of known deepfake videos are pornographic, almost all featuring female subjects[4]. While Nigeria has not yet seen widely publicized deepfake pornography cases, the threat is serious. As Nigerian analysts warn, unchecked synthetic media can breed a “zero-trust society” where nothing can be taken at face value[5].

NIGERIAN LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR DEEPFAKES

  1. Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015

The Act criminalises offences such as unlawful access[6], identity theft[7], cyberstalking[8], offensive messages and publishing obscene content[9]. For example, it bars sharing explicit or non-consensual intimate images (often called “revenge porn”), with offenders liable to fines or imprisonment[10]. It also protects privacy rights by outlawing unauthorised interception or tampering with electronic communications[11].

  1. Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023

This law classifies personal images and biometric data as “special” information requiring consent and security[12]. The law enshrines principles like data accuracy and purpose limitation. In fact, Nigerian law recognizes data accuracy as a fundamental right for data subjects[13]. A deepfake that fabricates someone’s likeness or voice likely violates these principles, since it misleadingly uses personal data.

  1. Criminal Code & Penal Code

The Criminal Code (in the southern states) and Penal Code (north) forbid defamation, hate speech and obscenity, provisions that could reach deepfake content depicting a real person in a humiliating or false way[14]. For example, knowingly sharing a manipulated video that defames someone could trigger criminal charges. Non-consensual deepfake pornography would violate these statutes.

  1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As Amended)

Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and information[15] and the right to dignity[16] and privacy[17]. Disinformation campaigns exploit free speech protections, while deepfake scandals offend privacy and dignity.

CHALLENGES OF REGULATING DEEPFAKES IN NIGERIA

Regulating deepfakes in Nigeria poses legal, technical, and enforcement challenges.

First, there is no dedicated legal provision. As noted, Nigerian statutes must treat deepfakes as variations of existing offences. A villain who posts a political deepfake might only be chargeable under general laws on forgery, fraud or defamation. Lawyers caution that without explicit offences, victims “might escape liability” because prosecutors must prove subjective intent under old statutes[18].

Second, enforcement capacity is limited. Nigerian law enforcement (NITDA, EFCC, NPF, etc.) and courts lack experience with AI-based evidence. For instance, when Dubawa analysts tested the Obi deepfake with forensic tools, they had to rely on manual analysis (lip-movement, voice patterns, and source tracking) to prove it was fake[19].

Third, digital literacy and public awareness are low. Many Nigerians may not yet understand what deepfakes are or how to spot them. Meanwhile, social-media platforms, which are the main channels for deepfakes, are largely unregulated locally.

Finally, technological limitations are a challenge. Nigeria’s cybersecurity and legal systems were designed for earlier cyberthreats. The emergence of synthetic media is a paradigm shift and governments must learn to detect altered signals (audio/video artifacts) and verify media origin.

REGULATORY OPTIONS & GLOBAL BEST PRACTICES FOR NIGERIA

Globally, countries are adopting multi-layered strategies to tackle deepfakes. Nigeria can adapt similar safeguards by:

  1. Criminalising malicious deepfakes:

Jurisdictions such as the UK[20], Australia[21], and USA[22] have criminalised creating or sharing non-consensual sexual deepfakes and misleading AI-generated content. These examples illustrate one path for Nigeria: enact specific offences for deepfake abuses.

  1. Regulation of Platforms and AI:

Another approach is to require platforms and AI developers to mitigate deepfake harms. The EU’s Digital Services Act (2022) requires major online platforms to control illegal and harmful content, including disinformation and manipulated media. It also strengthens the Code of Practice on Disinformation to address deepfakes, with penalties of up to 6% of global revenue for violations[23]. Although the DSA is Europe‑centric, its principles could guide Nigeria. For example, Nigeria could require social-media companies to implement transparent mechanisms for deepfake detection and removal (possibly enforced by NITDA or a new digital regulator). Nigeria could legislate that platforms must label clearly any AI‑generated media or provide a take‑down process for reported fakes. Nigeria should encourage platforms to adopt content traceability schemes so that when a deepfake circulates, its origin can be traced.

  1. Detection Technology and Collaboration:

Governments worldwide are investing in deepfake detection research. Nigeria can partner with universities and tech firms to develop tools suited to local languages and contexts. Media houses and telcos could pilot AI systems that flag altered videos.

  1. Public Awareness and Fact-Checking:

Raising digital literacy is critical. Nigeria already has active fact‑checking organisations (Dubawa, FactCheckAfrica, etc.). These groups can expand campaigns on how to recognise deepfakes (e.g. looking for lip-sync glitches, unusual audio cues).

  1. Civil and Regulatory Remedies:

Beyond criminal law, other remedies exist. Victims can sue deepfake creators for defamation or seek injunctions, although this can be slow and costly. Crucially, regulators like the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection  Commission (FCCPC) could label deceptive deepfake ads as unfair trade. Nigeria might also consider empowering ARCON to fine platforms or advertisers who knowingly circulate deepfake scams.

  1. International Coordination:

Deepfakes are a global problem. Nigeria should engage in multilateral initiatives. For example, Nigeria could support an ECOWAS regional framework on AI and disinformation, or collaborate with the AU on digital ethics. It could also request mutual legal assistance when deepfake perpetrators are abroad. In sum, Nigerian law and policy should not operate in isolation.

CONCLUSION

Deepfakes represent a complex new frontier in the struggle against digital harms. In Nigeria, the current patchwork of laws provides some tools but is not designed for AI‑powered fabrications. Given the recent surge of deepfake disinformation and fraud in Nigeria, the country cannot afford to wait until a crisis unfolds. A layered legal approach is necessary: one that updates legislation to encompass synthetic media, leverages technological safeguards (such as detection tools and watermarking standards), holds platforms accountable, and educates the public.

Nigeria might, for instance, amend the Cybercrimes Act to explicitly ban creating or using deepfake pornographic or fraud-inducing content, while strengthening enforcement capacity. It could also issue regulations requiring attribution for AI content and penalties for facilitating its spread. Equally important is public-private cooperation: telecom operators, banks and tech firms should share threat intelligence on deepfakes, and support verification initiatives. By combining these elements, Nigeria can mitigate the perils of deepfakes.

[1] Raphael Obasiohia, ‘Deepfake video falsely portrays Peter Obi praising Burkina Faso’s Ibrahim Traore’ (Duwaba, 19 June 2025) Deepfake video falsely portrays Peter Obi praising Burkina Faso’s Ibrahim Traoré – Dubawa  accessed 12 October 2025.

[2]Uchenna Val Obi, Daniel Anagu and Joshua Olawu, ‘Underlying Risks of Using AI-Generated Evidence in Nigeria’s Justice System’ (Lexology,10 October 2025) Underlying Risks Of Using AI-Generated Evidence In Nigeria’s Justice System – Lexology accessed 12 October 2025.

[3] Mustapha Lawal, ‘ Deepfake Deception: How AI-Generated Ads Are Misusing Nigerian Public Figures to Scam the Public’s (Fact check Africa, 15 June 2025) Deepfake Deception: How AI-Generated Ads Are Misusing Nigerian Public Figures to Scam the Public – Fact Check Africa accessed 12 October 2025

[4] Henry Ajder, Giorgio, Francesco Cavalli & Laurence Cullen ‘The State of Deepfakes : Landscape, Threats and Impact’s  (Deeptrace, September 2019) https://regmedia.co.uk/2019/10/08/deepfake_report.pdf , Immaculate Odekina, ‘Digital Rights in 2023 – The Rise of Deepfakes’ (Monday, 9 April 2025) Digital Rights In 2023 – The Rise Of Deepfakes – Privacy Protection – Nigeria accessed 12 October 2025.

[5] Immaculate Odekina, ‘Digital Rights in 2023 – The Rise of Deepfakes’ (Monday, 9 April 2025) Digital Rights In 2023 – The Rise Of Deepfakes – Privacy Protection – Nigeria accessed 12 October 2025.

[6] Section 6 Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act, 2015

[7] Section 13 Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act, 2015

[8] Section 24 Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act, 2015

[9] Section 23 Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act, 2015

[10] Stand To End Rape Initiative Rethinking Terminology: Non-Consensual Image Sharon offencesing vs. Revenge Porn – STER accessed 12 October 2025

[11] Sections 37 & 38 Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act, 2015

[12] Section 30 Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023

[13] Uchenna Val Obi, Daniel Anagu and Joshua Olawu, ‘Underlying Risks of Using AI-Generated Evidence in Nigeria’s Justice System’ (Lexology,10 October 2025) Underlying Risks Of Using AI-Generated Evidence In Nigeria’s Justice System – Lexology accessed 12 October 2025.

[14] Sections 373-380, 88A, 59, 233B-233F & 50(2) Criminal Code Act LFN; Sections 391-395, 94A & 204 Penal Code Act LFN.

[15] Section 39 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As Amended)

[16] Section 34 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As Amended)

[17] Section 37 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As Amended)

[18] Augusta Shahin, ‘Analysis of Nigeria’s Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act 2024 and Technology -Facilitated Gender-based Violence,(Lex initiative , 28 August 2025) Analysis of Nigeria’s Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act 2024 and Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence – Lex Initiative for Rights Advocacy and Development (LIRAD) accessed 12 October 2025.

[19] Raphael Obasiohia, ‘Deepfake video falsely portrays Peter Obi praising Burkina Faso’s Ibrahim Traore’ (Duwaba, 19 June 2025)  Deepfake video falsely portrays Peter Obi praising Burkina Faso’s Ibrahim Traoré – Dubawa accessed 12 October 2025.

[20] Ministry of Justice and Alex Davies-Jones MP, ‘Government Crackdown on Explicit Deepfakes ‘ (GOV.Uk, 7 January 2025) Government crackdown on explicit deepfakes – GOV.UK accessed 12 October 2025.

[21] Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer, ‘Criminalising deepfakes – the UK’s new offences following the Online Safety Act’ (21 May 2024) Criminalising deepfakes – the UK’s new offences following the Online Safety Act | Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer | Global law firm accessed 12 October 2025.

[22] Amanda Lawson ‘A Look at Global Deepfake Regulation Approaches’ (Responsible Artificial Intelligence Institute, 24 April 2023) A Look at Global Deepfake Regulation Approaches accessed 12 October 2025.

[23] Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer, ‘Criminalising deepfakes – the UK’s new offences following the Online Safety Act’ (21 May 2024) Criminalising deepfakes – the UK’s new offences following the Online Safety Act | Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer | Global law firm accessed 12 October 2025.

Get Legal Advice
To Top