HURIWA Demands Investigation and Prosecution of Bashir Ahmad Over Alleged Derogatory Remarks on Judiciary
The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) has issued a strong call for the arrest, investigation, and prosecution of Bashir Ahmad, the former Personal Assistant on New Media to ex-President Muhammadu Buhari, accusing him of making derogatory, reckless, and contemptuous comments about the Federal High Court and the integrity of the Nigerian judiciary.
The controversy began after an online exchange where Ahmad appeared to boast about having the capacity to influence court decisions during the Buhari administration. According to HURIWA, the former aide insinuated that he possessed access, leverage, and connections that enabled him to predetermine or sway judgments delivered by competent courts of law. His comments, which were reportedly posted on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), sparked intense backlash from users who condemned the implied abuse of power and interference in judicial processes.
In a statement released in Abuja by its National Media Affairs Director, Zainab Yusuf, HURIWA condemned Ahmad’s remarks as “a grave threat to constitutional democracy.” The group argued that such comments, even if later deleted, amount to an admission that political actors may have exercised undue influence over judicial proceedings during Buhari’s tenure. HURIWA further described the claim as deeply troubling because it suggests that executive aides operated with unchecked authority capable of “arm-twisting the judiciary” and undermining the sanctity of the courts.
Related News
Enugu Government Nullifies Forced Marriage Between 33-Year-Old Man and 15-Year-Old Girl, Launches Full Investigation
Enugu State Government has nullified the forced marriage between 33-year-old Sopuluchukwu Odoh and 15-year-old Precious Oyiga, arresting all involved and…
Yusuf noted that although Ahmad hurriedly deleted the post after public outrage, the deletion does not erase the implications of what he said or the concerns it raises. “This subtle admission of near-infinite capacity to predetermine decisions of the competent courts of law has rubbished the sanctity of Nigeria’s judicial system,” the statement said. HURIWA emphasized that the judiciary remains the last hope of the common man, and any threat to its independence must be met with swift accountability.
The civil rights group insisted that law enforcement agencies should not treat the matter as a mere social media controversy but as a serious allegation worthy of thorough investigation. According to them, Ahmad’s comments, whether made jokingly or in earnest, warrant immediate scrutiny to determine if he indeed interfered with court processes or exploited his proximity to presidential power.
The debate surrounding the issue has also spiraled into public discourse, with many Nigerians questioning whether Ahmad currently holds any office. Some point out that he is no longer in government, arguing that calls for him to be sacked appear misplaced. Others insist that the issue transcends his present status and touches on broader concerns about ethical governance, separation of powers, and the rule of law during the previous administration.
Online reactions capture the polarized nature of the discussion. Many Nigerians criticized Ahmad for carelessly making such statements, describing him as impulsive, reckless, or emboldened by power dynamics of the past. Some users mocked the judiciary for allegedly enabling such behavior, while others argued that Ahmad’s comments merely reflect what many already suspected — that political interference in judicial affairs was rampant and unchecked.
Several commentators also questioned the origin of the resurfaced controversy, suggesting the remarks may refer to an older tweet that has recently regained public attention due to new political disputes involving Ahmad. Nevertheless, the underlying concern remains the same: potential abuse of institutional power and the fragility of judicial independence.
HURIWA’s position underscores a growing call among civil society organizations for greater transparency, accountability, and reform within Nigeria’s governance structures. They maintain that no democracy can function effectively when the judiciary is perceived as compromised or susceptible to political manipulation.
As pressure mounts, the Nigerian public awaits whether authorities will initiate any formal inquiry into the allegations — and whether the judiciary itself will respond to claims that challenge its credibility.