🌿 Ruzu Non-Alcoholic Herbal Bitters
Ruzu Non-Alcoholic Herbal Bitters is a natural health supplement specially formulated to:
- ✅ Promote general wellness
- ✅ Detoxify the body
- ✅ Support the treatment of various ailments
Made from a powerful blend of 100% organic and medicinal herbs, Ruzu is completely alcohol-free, making it ideal for:
- 👪 All age groups
- 🌱 Health-conscious individuals
- 🌿 Anyone seeking non-alcoholic herbal remedies
Whether you're looking to boost your vitality, cleanse your system, or support healing the natural way, Ruzu Bitters offers a trusted herbal solution.
President Bola Tinubu has been called by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, or SERAP, to order Minister of Communications, Innovation, and Digital Economy Bosun Tijani to immediately revoke the 2019 Lawful Interception of Communications Regulations.
The rules are “unconstitutional, unlawful, and entirely inconsistent with Nigeria’s international obligations,” according to SERAP.
This was stated in a letter written by Kolawole Oluwadare, the deputy director of SERAP, dated February 21, 2026.
In order to guarantee that any framework for legitimate interception conforms with constitutional protections, judicial supervision, and international human rights norms, the organization underlined the critical need for an open legislative process.
The call follows claims that the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, had his phone conversation intercepted by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai.
According to reports, El-Rufai said, “The NSA’s call was tapped. We heard him remark, “They should arrest me,” and they also do it to our calls.
According to SERAP, the rules create “a sweeping mass surveillance regime that violates Nigerians’ constitutionally and internationally guaranteed human rights, including to privacy and freedom of expression.”
Without sufficient judicial safeguards, independent oversight, transparency, or effective remedies, the organization cautioned that the regulations give “overly broad and imprecise authorities to intercept communications on grounds such as “national security,” “economic wellbeing,” and “public emergency.”
Concerns regarding the general elections in 2027 were also raised in the letter, which said that “broad and weakly safeguarded interception powers create a real risk of abuse during politically sensitive periods.”
It went on to say, “Political opponents, journalists, civil society actors, and election observers can readily be weaponized by surveillance measures that lack strict necessity, proportionality, and independent judicial oversight.”
“Free and fair elections depend on confidential communications, protected journalistic sources, and open democratic debate,” SERAP emphasized, highlighting the significance of privacy in political processes.
“The right of Nigerians to political participation and electoral integrity would be seriously undermined by any misuse of intercepted data for intimidation, political advantage, or disinformation.”
The group warned that the existing rules “fail all three tests” of legality, need, and proportionality and demanded that interception powers be limited, well-defined, supported by independent judicial permission and strong remedies.
SERAP expressed concern about two specific provisions: Regulation 23, which permits the Nigerian Communications Commission to designate additional authorities with interception powers, thereby creating “ambiguity and undermining legal certainty,” and Regulation 4, which grants “broad discretionary interception power with minimal clarity regarding the scope or limits of such discretion.”
The group also criticized mandatory disclosure of encryption keys, provisions that permit interception without a warrant in broad circumstances, and the failure to notify affected individuals, claiming that these measures “weaken cybersecurity for everyone and fail to provide safeguards for journalists, lawyers, and human rights defenders.”
In its conclusion, SERAP stated that although the government has a duty to combat organized crime and national security, these goals must be pursued within the bounds of international human rights law and the constitution. In a democratic society, the regulations are neither appropriate nor required.
The group also threatened to take “all appropriate legal actions to ensure the government complies with our request in the public interest” if it did not receive a response within seven days.
