Law enforcement Institutional framework Implementation challenges Weak institutional coordination Technical capacity Digital forensics Underreporting Public awareness Doctrinal research methodology

THE EVOLUTION OF CYBERCRIME IN NIGERIA: EMERGING THREATS, LEGAL GAPS, AND THE DIGITAL FUTURE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

Author(s)
Faculty
Department
Year of Publication
Publication Type
Abstract
This research examines the evolution of cybercrime in Nigeria, highlighting how rapid digitization has created new avenues for offences such as financial fraud, identity theft, ransomware attacks, and cyberstalking. Although Nigeria has enacted the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015 and established specialized institutions for enforcement, the country continues to face persistent challenges in implementation. Weak institutional coordination, inadequate technical capacity, slow investigative procedures, underreporting, and limited public awareness all contribute to the widening gap between law and practice. The study employs a doctrinal research methodology, analyzing statutory provisions, case law, institutional frameworks, and scholarly commentary. It reveals that cybercrime persists not because of a lack of legislation, but because enforcement structures remain fragmented and technologically outdated. Comparative insights from jurisdictions such as the United States and the United Kingdom demonstrate that successful cybercrime control depends on sustained investment in digital forensics, inter-agency collaboration, and public-private partnerships with telecom and fintech sectors.
The study recommends targeted reforms including a comprehensive amendment of the 2015 Act, improved institutional coordination, training of cybersecurity personnel, enhanced digital infrastructure, stricter financial monitoring systems, and greater public digital literacy. It concludes that Nigeria’s ability to combat emerging digital threats and protect its socio-economic future depends on building stronger, technology driven, transparent, and independent enforcement institutions.
Supervisor(s)
co-supervisor