Enugu Under Surveillance: Who Watches the Watchers?

By Gio Yoma 

The Enugu State Government is expanding its use of CCTV and AI-enabled surveillance technology to monitor activities across major roads and neighbourhoods, with a Command and Control Centre coordinating the security infrastructure.

The government’s stated objective is to strengthen security and make Enugu safer.

But as the surveillance network grows, a critical question demands attention:

Who watches the watchers?

The issue is not whether government should use technology to fight crime. It should. The concern is whether adequate legal and institutional safeguards exist to prevent the technology from being abused.

The state has announced substantial investment in CCTV infrastructure, including AI-enabled cameras and mobile surveillance equipment. Yet citizens need greater clarity on the rules governing the collection, storage and use of the information generated.

What happens to footage of innocent citizens? Who can access it? How long is it retained? Can it be shared with other agencies? Is facial recognition being used? And what prevents the system from being deployed against political opponents, journalists, activists or government critics?

The absence of clear answers can create an accountability gap.

A surveillance system introduced to fight criminals must never become an instrument for political witch-hunting or personal revenge.

Nigeria’s data-protection framework provides important principles around lawful processing, transparency, purpose limitation and retention of personal data. The scale of Enugu’s surveillance project makes it important for the state to demonstrate how these protections are being applied.

The solution

Enugu does not need to abandon its security technology. Instead, it should strengthen public confidence by establishing clear safeguards.

The state should:

• publish the policy governing the surveillance system;
• disclose appropriate details of expenditure and procurement;
• clarify who can access recorded footage;
• establish clear data-retention periods;
• conduct and appropriately disclose a Data Protection Impact Assessment;
• create independent oversight and audit mechanisms;
• provide citizens with a complaint and redress system; and
• expressly prohibit the use of surveillance for political intimidation or unlawful monitoring.

Every access to archived footage should be logged and independently auditable, while AI-generated alerts should never automatically be treated as proof of guilt.

Enugu has an opportunity to become a model for responsible technology-driven security.

The cameras can watch the streets, but the law must watch the cameras. And independent institutions must watch those who operate them.