By AbdulRahman AbdulRaheem, Managing Editor, PRNigeria

Now we have learn, with eager curiosity and deep concern, the rejoinder issued by Professor Sola Adeyanju, Head of Public Affairs on the Nationwide Institute for Coverage and Strategic Research (NIPSS), in response to widespread media reviews on the unjust suspension of Mr. Yushau A. Shuaib—famend communication strategist, founding father of PRNigeria, and a participant of the Senior Government Course (SEC) 47.

This assertion will not be a protection of my boss. Quite, it’s a obligatory and knowledgeable response, particularly as PRNigeria’s digital infrastructure—particularly its editorial electronic mail—was unlawfully accessed by NIPSS. Extra importantly, the information article that prompted the primary question in opposition to Mr. Shuaib, titled “NIPSS Goes Digital”, was written below my editorial authority. I, not Mr. Shuaib, bear full editorial duty, and I’m not affiliated with NIPSS.

But, in its rejoinder, NIPSS conspicuously ignores the gravest situation: the unauthorised interception of our official editorial electronic mail—containing confidential correspondence, story leads, and delicate data. This intrusion quantities to a violation of the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, and so forth.) Act, 2015, which criminalises illegal entry to digital communication.

Following the incident, PRNigeria’s broader infrastructure—together with these of Financial Confidential and Tech Digest—has suffered repeated tried breaches. We’re presently working with cybersecurity specialists and authorized counsel to analyze the scope and timeline of those violations, and we’ll pursue authorized redress the place obligatory.

NIPSS should reply a direct query: Did the Institute, or anybody performing on its instruction, entry PRNigeria’s editorial electronic mail with out authorized authorisation? If that’s the case, below what justification and authorized framework? In a democratic society, such questions can’t be brushed apart as mere inner disciplinary affairs.

It is usually baffling that Mr. Shuaib was punished for an editorial resolution in a newsroom he formally handed over earlier than commencing the NIPSS course. A replica of that handover letter was formally submitted to NIPSS administration. Punishing a participant for content material he neither wrote nor cleared—after he had relinquished management—raises severe questions on motive and equity.

Furthermore, Mr. Shuaib’s second article, “Understanding the ‘Blue’ within the Blue Economic system”, didn’t point out NIPSS in any respect. It was a thought management piece, rooted in public information, that merely aligned with nationwide coverage themes below President Tinubu. That this was twisted right into a disciplinary offence speaks volumes.

Allow us to be clear: Mr. Shuaib will not be an agitator. His file in selling peaceable coexistence, strategic communication, and public accountability spans a long time. His awards from each nationwide and worldwide our bodies attest to this. To counsel, because the rejoinder does, that he has undermined NIPR or used his platform for blackmail will not be solely false however defamatory.

In truth, the dearth of procedural transparency in NIPSS’s actions is staggering. The official suspension letter failed to say any period, but the rejoinder now retroactively imposes a six-week time period. What sort of disciplinary course of withholds such important data from the topic whereas revealing it publicly afterward?

Mr. Shuaib paid ₦18.2 million for a programme that features research excursions and mental engagement. But, he was suspended, excluded from research excursions, barred from inner communication channels, and successfully ostracised—with out a formal listening to or closing verdict.

Allow us to ask: What kind of suppose tank treats its intellectuals like insubordinate schoolboys? What world-class strategic institute disciplines individuals for exercising editorial independence or partaking in nationwide discourse? At Harvard’s Kennedy Faculty, Chatham Home within the UK, or Singapore’s Civil Service Faculty, such views are celebrated, not silenced.

NIPSS’s therapy of Mr. Shuaib undermines all the things the Institute claims to face for: vital pondering, coverage innovation, and moral management. As an alternative, it sends a chilling message—conform or be punished.

This situation goes past the victimisation of 1 particular person; it speaks to the sort of management and governance tradition we’re normalising. Within the petition to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, two key personalities have been referenced—Barrister Nima Salman Mann, Performing Director of Research, and Rear Admiral A.A. Mustapha, a Directing Employees. The query stays: have been these officers performing below the directive of the Director Normal of NIPSS, or on their very own accord? Clarifying this could assist determine who needs to be held accountable for this deeply embarrassing episode—not only for Mr. Shuaib, the sufferer however for the Institute itself.

Much more troubling is the NIPSS spokesperson’s try to rationalise why a optimistic media report on the federal government’s financial reforms warranted disciplinary motion below imprecise and non-existent laws. If an establishment entrusted with shaping nationwide coverage can not accommodate complimentary narratives in regards to the administration it serves, how will it reply to constructive dissent or uphold skilled independence?

Should all the things be militarised? Are individuals to be handled as schoolchildren—subjected to bullying and suppression—slightly than as skilled professionals deserving of respect and mental freedom?

Subsequently, we respectfully name on NIPSS to handle and make clear the problem of digital surveillance and unauthorised electronic mail entry; to interact PRNigeria by means of applicable editorial channels slightly than concentrating on its founder; to reaffirm its dedication to transparency, mental freedom, and justice; and to acknowledge and rectify the procedural irregularities that marred its disciplinary course of.

In moments like this, establishments are judged not by the facility they wield however by the values they uphold. NIPSS has a selection—to retreat into vanity or to steer with accountability.

The world is watching. So are we.

AbdulRahman AbdulRaheem, Managing Editor, PRNigeria