El-Rufai, Illegal Wiretapping and the Limits of Bail

The practice of recording telephone conversations and engaging in illegal wiretapping, once primarily the domain of state security agencies, has become widespread with the advent of modern technology. The article draws a parallel to the historical 'Watergate' scandal in the US, where illegal wiretapping for political intelligence led to President Richard Nixon's resignation.

“

In the UK and Nigeria, as long as the individual recording is a participant in the telephone conversation, such recording doesn’t appear to be an offence even without the consent of the other participants in the conversation.

Today, individuals can easily record conversations. In the UK and Nigeria, recording a conversation in which one is a participant is generally not an offense, even without the other party's consent. However, this differs in 12 US states, including California, Florida, and Washington, which require all parties to consent to such recordings.

Some justify non-consensual recordings as necessary for maintaining accurate records, especially in work and business contexts. The author aligns with states like Florida, citing Section 37 of Nigeria's 1999 Constitution, which guarantees the right to privacy in homes and communications. Recording someone without consent is seen as a potential violation of this personal right, though it can serve as evidence if a party is a habitual liar.

“

But, in 12 States in USA including California, Florida, Maryland and Washington, all-party consent is required to record conversations that the recorder is part of.

Crucially, the article distinguishes between recording one's own conversations and illegal wiretapping, which involves intercepting or recording others' conversations without a court order or legal authority. In the US, this is a federal felony under the Wiretap Act, carrying significant penalties.

“

Personally, I have never done such before; I align with States like Florida, because Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) (the Constitution) guarantees citizens the right to their privacy, in their homes, telephone conversations and telegraphic communications, and recording someone in a conversation without their consent appears to violate this personal right to privacy.