The Nigerian Defence Headquarters has defended the arrest of social media influencer Justice Mark Chidiebere, popularly known as Justice Crack, describing the move as necessary to protect national security and military discipline during ongoing conflicts.
In a detailed statement issued by civil military relations expert Tijjani Tanko, the military argued that Nigeria’s security situation requires strict caution, particularly in how information is shared online.
“Nigeria is not at peace… our armed forces are locked in daily combat against terrorists and bandits,” the statement said, warning that “the difference between ‘free speech’ and ‘subversive act’ is not academic – it is life and death.”
The Defence Headquarters said the influencer went beyond raising concerns and instead incited disobedience among troops. “He did not merely amplify complaints… he actively urged soldiers to question their commanders’ legitimacy, refuse orders, and post videos attacking military hierarchy,” the statement said.
According to the military, some soldiers admitted receiving payments to share internal grievances, which authorities say should have been handled through official channels.
Officials stressed that the arrest followed due process, noting that the influencer was not tried by the military. “Crucially, the Army did not court-martial the influencer. He was handed over to civilian police for normal criminal prosecution,” the statement said.
The Defence Headquarters rejected claims that the action was an attempt to silence criticism, drawing a distinction between whistleblowing and what it described as subversion. “A real whistleblower reports specific, verifiable wrongdoing… Justice Crack did none of that. He broadcast unverified, one-sided narratives meant to make soldiers feel abandoned,” the statement added.
It also warned that such content could be exploited by insurgent groups. “Terrorist groups already use such posts to claim ‘the Nigerian Army is starving’… lowering troop morale and encouraging desertion,” the statement said.
The military maintained that its response was measured and necessary to prevent a breakdown in discipline. “If the military does nothing… the result will be crumbling discipline, friendly fire, and avoidable deaths,” it said.
Highlighting the psychological impact of such content, the statement added that trust within the chain of command is critical in combat situations. “When a frontline soldier… watches a viral video accusing his commander… trust in the chain of command erodes,” it said.
The Defence Headquarters concluded that while criticism of military policy is allowed, direct engagement with soldiers to incite disobedience would not be tolerated. “Debate military policy… that is welcome. But directly engaging serving soldiers to provoke indiscipline will face the law,” the statement said.
The military also outlined recommendations, including creating faster welfare complaint systems, improving transparency, and encouraging responsible reporting by media and influencers. “The Justice Crack case was not an assault on free expression; it was a lawful intervention to prevent the weaponization of social media against combat morale,” the statement concluded.
