Cybercrimes and Computer Misuse is a commonplace knot in this digital era of information technology, sometimes rendering toxic misinformation to the public.

Ardently, the Ministry of Justice comes up with measures to retrain hazardous misuse of technology, which is meant for positive development.

However, as the bill is already tabled to the transitional national Assembly, lawmakers must be keen on sorting out obnoxious and fictitious clauses that might hurt the rights of the citizens.

Rights of citizens and the interest of the state, do not sail on the same boat but rather supersede each other and in the process the latter pinches the former. In a lean skin of freedom of expression and speech, one could be misconstrued as inciting.

In an ideal environment, members of parliament would consult and acclimatize the bill to their voters at constituencies before approval. But as this key segment is unlikely to happen, its absence might give rise to a draconian law that suffocates rights advocacy.

Most unfortunately, the majority of lawmakers only reach their geographical constituencies through phone and social media, even though the constituents are in anguish.

Unlike the National Security Bill that has left many lamenting and calling on the President to abscond its approbation, the Cybercrimes and Computer Misuse Bill must be thoroughly scrutinized. It must balance equitably on the weighing scale to favour both the state and reserve rights to free speech and expression of the citizens.