Nigerian international affairs experts and other experts have reacted to the new visa restriction on Nigerian travellers to the United States, with most criticising the US policy and describing it as counterproductive.
The US mission in a message on X, its official social media handle formerly known as Twitter, on Monday mandated Nigerian visa applicants to disclose their social media profiles and activities in the last five years, stressing that failure to comply with the requirement could lead to denial of entry into the US.
This was an update on an earlier and similar regulation targeted at international student visa applicants. It mandated that they list and remove the privacy settings from their social media handles to allow for proper vetting of the applications.
The US Embassy noted that this decision has become necessary as the regulation is part of the Trump administration’s efforts to “ensure national security” in the ongoing immigration tightening measures.
The new rule also stipulates that visa applicants must provide information on their User ID, including the email address, Username, handle, and telephone number, for all platforms and applications they have used in the last five years.
The US also requires applicants who have used more than one platform or more than one username, handle, or telephone number on a single platform within the same period to list them in the DS-160 form.
“Visa applicants must list all social media usernames or handles of every platform they have used from the last five years on the DS-160 visa application form. Applicants should certify that the information in their visa application is true and correct before they sign and submit.
“Omitting social media information on your application could lead to visa denial and ineligibility for future U.S visas.
“Enter information associated with your online presence, including the types of online providers/platforms, applications and websites you use to collaborate, share information and interact with others. List the username, handle, screen name and other identifiers associated with your social media profile,” the Mission said.
However, in a swift response to this apparent move to restrict Nigerians, on Tuesday, Nigeria’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its spokesman, Kimiebi Ebienfa, expressed deep concern about this worrisome and persistent US effort to undermine Nigerian visa applicants, and vowed to present an interagency response to this threat.
The Nigerian government attributed the US action to its refusal to accept third-country deportees from the US into Nigeria, stressing that it had the sovereign right to defend its interests as provided for under international law.
“The Ministry expresses concerns about the new development, but we are not surprised because it is one of the issues they promised to address during our recent engagements. We have maintained our stand on the issue of rejecting third-country deportees, so we know they might try to implement stricter measures.
“But be assured that the federal government will hold an inter-agency meeting and agree on the best reciprocal action,” the spokesman said.
Speaking on the matter, renowned intellectual and former Dean of the Department of Political Science and International Relations, University of Abuja, Professor Yusuf Zoaka, criticised the decision, stressing that in the era of globalisation, immigration policies must evolve beyond isolationist approaches.
He said, “The principle of reciprocity should guide international migration, where cross-border movement is based on mutual benefit and contribution. While nations have the right to protect their interests, blanket restrictions are counterproductive to global economic and cultural exchange.”
He said that as a global leader, the United States must transition from its fragmented and potentially discriminatory immigration system to a more inclusive, standardised approach.
He also urged the United Nations to play a pivotal role in developing universal immigration standards that prioritise skills, potential economic contribution, and cultural exchange; ensuring fair and transparent evaluation of potential immigrants; eliminating arbitrary or discriminatory entry barriers, and recognising the interconnected nature of the modern global economy.
Such a framework, he noted, would transform immigration from a defensive, restrictive process to a strategic, collaborative mechanism for international development and understanding.
“By embracing a more open, merit-based approach, countries can harness global talent while maintaining national security and cultural integrity.
“The goal should be creating a balanced, equitable system that recognises human mobility as a fundamental aspect of our increasingly interconnected world,” he added.
Policy is an abuse of human rights
On his part, another expert on international relations, Dr. Austin Maho, condemned the new policy, describing it as “contentious and controversial.”
He said, “Primarily, it raises concerns about freedom of expression and privacy violations. Arguably, forcing applicants to make their social media accounts available for scrutiny exposes their private content and personal exchanges to certain risks.
“This is worrisome coming from a country that has always been the bastion of individual freedom and liberty. The new requirement has the potential of forcing people to go off social media to reduce their digital footprints, thereby hindering their freedom of expression, which is the cornerstone of democratic societies, or be forced into self-censorship or delete old posts out of fear.”
He added that people may even begin to express themselves in ways that would please the United States to enhance their visa application, which will amount to a subtle but effective control of social media content in favour of the US government.
“Besides, social media posts can be taken out of context, or minor old posts could be misinterpreted, potentially leading to visa denial. No matter how you look at it, this cannot be a good policy.’
Maho contended that despite the US government’s argument that the policy is for national security, it is inimical to the democratic principle of freedom of expression, a fundamental human right.
“The policy is intrusive, authoritarian and a usurpation of human rights, individual freedom and liberty, which the US government should jettison in the interests of fairness and justice to would-be visa applicants,” he added.
US visa policy discriminatory, raises ethical questions
Commenting on the US visa policies mandating Nigerian visa applicants to disclose their social media profiles and activities in the last five years, human rights lawyer Jiti Ogunye said the requirements raise concerns about potential privacy rights violations and serious ethical questions.
Jiti remarked that the US government has framed the policy as asserting its sovereign rights to determine who can enter the country and under what conditions, but the approach appears to target specific nationalities unfairly.
He said, “I see several issues with this policy. Firstly, in international diplomacy, relations between countries are typically governed by the principle of reciprocity—what one country does for another should be reciprocated.
“In this context, it would have been appropriate for the U.S. government to propose this measure to the Nigerian government for consideration. This way, Nigeria could decide whether to implement a similar requirement for American citizens applying for visas to visit Nigeria.
“While the U.S. may assert that social media content is public and available for scrutiny, unilaterally imposing such a requirement on Nigerians and others wishing to visit the U.S. raises significant ethical questions.
“Furthermore, we have yet to see confirmation that this policy is being applied universally to all countries, including Britain, Germany, and others from the European Union and beyond. Until consistency in how these policies are applied globally, this approach appears to target specific nationalities unfairly,” he stated.
A Lagos-based immigration lawyer, Victoria Tokolo, described the demand for visa applicants to disclose their social media profiles and activities from the past five years as intrusive and potentially discriminatory, placing Nigerians under increased scrutiny.
While he acknowledged that the U.S. has the authority and responsibility to strengthen its national security and protect its borders, he emphasised that if this measure, first introduced in 2019, is not well-structured and monitored, it could violate the fundamental rights of visa applicants.
He raised concerns about privacy rights and freedom of expression regarding social media disclosure requirements.
The lawyer called on the federal government to intervene and protect Nigerians, as the policy could be misused, and social media content may be subject to misinterpretation.
Senator Ayo Arise said, “It is a decision of the United States of America; every country has its sovereignty, and they can decide on their policy for issuing a visa to anyone in any country as they deem fit.
‘’But they can’t dictate that the social media account should have been operated in the last five years, because I don’t think it is everybody that has social account that has been operated for five years, but I think if that is what they are looking for, it is targeted at those who probably have terrorist tendencies or who have posted things they consider a threat to the interest of United States.’’
Remain at home and develop your country
For Comrade Shina Loremikan, campaign coordinator against Impunity, a general economic meltdown exists worldwide, and every nation is trying to adjust to this reality.
“So the message is, ‘Sit down in your country and be productive,” he said.
“Forty years ago, the problem of homelessness was not known in the USA. Today, the issue of homelessness has transcended America, right into the heart of the United Kingdom. In the city of London, there is an increasing rate of homelessness.
“If you go to Manchester, there is also homelessness; if you go to Liverpool, there is homelessness. Things that were unknown to the British people 25 years ago, they now live with them in reality.
“The reality is that while some people are selling their personal effects and properties in Nigeria to relocate to other countries like the United Kingdom, the rich and powerful in the UK are relocating to other countries like Switzerland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, or even Dubai.”
According to him, while the rich in the UK are relocating, the middle class in Nigeria is rushing at any opportunity to go to the UK, where housing costs have increased, and the economic reality has changed.
“They are also adjusting to ensure that they limit their social funds for vulnerable persons who will be entering their country. The message is: everybody, sit down in your country and be productive.”
It is a tool of exclusion
For Akin Ajibade, a renowned sociologist, the U.S. government’s decision to mandate full disclosure of social media activity over the past five years is worrisome.
He said, “While national security concerns are valid, this level of scrutiny borders on surveillance and could be considered a violation of personal privacy. Social media is often a space for self-expression, satire, and political commentary, especially in societies like Nigeria where young people use digital platforms for frustration and activism.
“To judge visa eligibility based on one’s digital persona that might be taken out of context risks reinforcing bias, silencing dissent, and unfairly penalising those who exercise their freedom of expression online.”
He further stressed that for a continent that faces extensive visa hurdles, this policy raises many questions about the unequal burden placed on applicants from countries like Nigeria.
“This new requirement adds another layer of gatekeeping that would likely disproportionately impact students, professionals, artists, and others seeking global opportunities.
“It shows an alarming trend where mobility is increasingly policed through digital footprints, without clear safeguards to protect applicants from misinterpretation or ideological profiling.
“No doubt, the policy, though framed as a security measure, risks becoming a tool of exclusion that undermines both privacy rights and the principle of equal access to global engagement.”
US can decide what’s best for its national security
But on his part, Comrade Mark Adebayo, the spokesperson for Coalition of United Political Parties, CUPP, said Nigerians cannot determine for the USA or any other country the kind of policy to protect their country, adding that if the government believes the policy is what can defend the country, it is free to implement the policy.
‘’What is important is for the Nigerian leadership to fix the country. If Nigeria is ok, our people will not be desperate to go to other countries. Today, you don’t read of the Japanese struggling to leave their country and go anywhere, despite the high rate of landslides or earthquakes; you don’t hear of them leaving their country; likewise, the people of Rwanda.
“Rwanda, which has just emerged from a terrible war, is the cleanest country in Africa and the number one country improving technology in Africa. We cannot decide for America how they wish to run their country; they can devise any policy that suits them.
In this era of international terrorism, any country will come up with any policy it feels can protect its country. We are subjected to this kind of embarrassment because of the lack of responsible leadership that works for the country’s progress, advancement and stability.
“We only have leaders that are self-centred, selfish and irresponsible, that is why the third world countries as well are giving us ridiculous conditions before we can come to their country.
“If we put our house in order, and Nigeria is good on the pedestal of development and progress, nobody, no country will be giving us ridiculous conditions before we come to their country.”
