Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
Please note that the FactCheckHub has not obtained any right from the authors or copyright owners of all third-party contents from embedded links and shall incur no liability in this regard.
A photo purportedly showing a young version of President Bola Tinubu in 1966 has surfaced online.
An X user, @imakun122, posted the image among a photo collage, which has four photos chronicling the growth of the president since childhood. The image is located in the first frame of the collage.
He posted the collage with a caption :
“Our president since childhood to old age.”
The post has generated over 500 reposts and more than 2000 likes as of September 22, 2025.
CLAIM
Photo shows Tinubu in 1966.
screenshot of the viral post
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is MISLEADING.
For decades, Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s identity has been the subject of political debate and public controversy in Nigeria. Questions have persisted about his real date of birth, with conflicting records suggesting different years.
While official documents list his birth date as March 29, 1952, some reports and critics allege discrepancies in his age declarations across forms submitted for political office, fueling suspicions about inconsistencies in his personal records.
He has faced scrutiny over his family lineage and past. Critics argue that the gaps in his early life story, including questions about his parentage and the origin of his name, remain unresolved.
His political opponents have repeatedly weaponised these controversies to question his integrity and eligibility for public office. As a result of these lingering disputes, many old pictures have been posted online to stem the controversies.
The FactCheckHub subjected the image to reverse image search, and the result shows that Donald Duke, a former governor of Cross River State, is in the image. An earlier version of the photo can be seen here and here.
The photo was among many photos circulated online in the build-up to the 2023 general election.
Donald Duke is a Nigerian politician and lawyer who served as the Governor of Cross River State from 1999 to 2007 under the People’s Democratic Party (PDP).
file photo; Donald Duke
Born on September 30, 1961, in Calabar, he studied law at Ahmadu Bello University and later earned a master’s degree in business law from the University of Pennsylvania. He contested for the presidency in 2019 under the Social Democratic Party (SDP) but later stepped down.
VERDICT
The claim that the image shows Tinubu in 1966 is MISLEADING, as findings show that the image shows Donaldo Duke, former governor of Cross River State.
FORMER Nigerian lawmaker, Dino Melaye, has claimed that Nigeria and South Africa were placed on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list at the same time, but while South Africa has exited, Nigeria remains listed.
Melaye who made the claim while speaking on Arise TV’s prime time said :
“Nigeria was listed by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). We are on what is called the grey list today. And that is having a negative concomitant effect on the economy. Any country that is on the grey list of FATF, definitely it will affect your direct foreign investment, and it will affect your banking activities across the globe. It is going to have a resultant negative effect on the economy. Nigeria and south africa went into the grey list at the same time. South Africa carried out a lot of reforms, and today they are out of the grey list, but Nigeria is still on the grey list.”
CLAIM
South Africa has exited the FATF grey list while Nigeria remains on it.
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show the claim is FALSE.
The FATF greylist denotes countries that do not meet the FATF’s minimum standards for Effective anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism, but are cooperating with the organisation to reach those benchmarks. These countries are put under increased economic supervision and regulation.
Nigeria and South Africa were both placed on the FATF “jurisdictions under increased monitoring” list in February 2023. This means the country has committed to resolving swiftly the identified strategic deficiencies within agreed timeframes and is subject to increased monitoring. This list is often externally referred to as the “grey list”.
FATF’s public statements and follow-up documents make clear that both countries remained on the list through 2025 while they worked to fix strategic deficiencies in their anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorist-financing frameworks.
Nigeria has made a series of reforms cited by FATF and other observers, including the Central Bank of Nigeria’s Customer Due Diligence regulation (2023), updates to Bureau de Change rules, and new measures on non-profit organisations, and FATF approved Nigeria’s fifth progress report on 21 February 2025. However, FATF explicitly said Nigeria would remain on the list pending on-site verification of the effectiveness of those reforms.
South Africa likewise completed major reforms. At its June 2025 plenary, FATF determined South Africa had substantially completed its action plan and warranted an on-site assessment to verify implementation. South Africa’s National Treasury and FATF documents stated that, following that determination, an on-site visit would be scheduled and that delisting would only follow a successful verification.
This means South Africa is still awaiting a final on-site visit before removal from the list.
The on-site visit will take place before the next FATF plenary. If the outcome of the visit is positive, the FATF will delist South Africa from the grey list at its next plenary in October.
The visit will involve intensive engagements with public and private sector stakeholders to confirm that the country’s AML/CFT reforms are working in practice.
This shows that, contrary to Melaye’s statement, both Nigeria and South Africa remain on the FATF grey list.
VERDICT
Senator Dino Melaye’s statement that South Africa had exited while Nigeria remained listed is therefore inaccurate. As of September 2025, neither country had been formally removed by FATF. South Africa was closer to delisting after completing reforms and undergoing an on-site assessment, but an official removal required FATF’s plenary decision.
A claim is circulating online that the Federal Government has decided to remove pockets from police officers’ uniforms.
The claim was posted on Facebook by a user under the name Whale Mouth Comedy.
The post read:
Nigeria Police latest update, will this stop them from collecting bribes. A Body Cam would save us all this stress. Currently, Nigeria police officers sew their own uniforms and buy boots themselves.
Since the inception of the post on Tuesday, September 2, 2025, it has garnered over twenty thousand views, 13,200 comments, and 2000 likes.
A scan of the comments section of the post showed that the majority of the users thought the post was real, thereby prompting The FactCheckHub to verify the veracity of the claim.
Shedrack Gani wrote:
Even if police wear boxers they will collect bribe, is in their blood.
Another user Samuel Oluwarotimi wrote:
Is it the pocket that’s collecting the money or the personnel on the uniform!
Ernest Madu wrote in pidgin :
pocket keh na only police for road dey use pocket … review their salary then make it a dismisable offense to collect bribe
CLAIM
FG to remove pocket from police uniforms to tackle bribery
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is FALSE!
Screenshot of The Claim; Insert FALSE Verdict
At first glance, the claim appears to be some form of satire from the author, considering his username. But a look at his supporting statement, which read thus, cleared doubts:
A Body Cam would save us all this stress. Currently, Nigeria police officers sew their own uniforms and buy boots themselves
When we ran a keyword search for the phrase “Pockets Police Uniform,” it only returned search results showing instances of the claim on other platforms.
There were no reports or press releases from either the presidency, the Nigeria Police Force, or credible media outlets stating that the federal government had taken such a measure.
When The FactCheckHub reached out to PRO of the FCT police command, Josephine Adeh, she stated that she was not aware of such developments, while branding it as lies.
“I’m not aware of such claims, ma. Lies”, Adeh told The FactCheckHub
THE VERDICT
The claim that the FG plans to remove pockets from police uniforms to tackle bribery is false; media outfits across the country would widely report such a move.
A claim that a video shows a French helicopter providing supplies to terrorists in Mali is circulating on X.
The claim, which was contained in a video post shared on the X app by user @cecild84.
The over two-minute video showed a helicopter descending toward a hilly area, where people were gathered. Uniformed personnel could be seen rappelling from the aircraft to rescue someone, after which the helicopter ascended back into the sky
The post had a caption alongside that read:
“A satellite video of the Sahel, showing a French military helicopter providing supplies to the Terrorist in Northern Mali. The same France that lied to Mali for over a decade, that it was helping that nation in its fight against terrorism.”
Since the inception of the post on Saturday, September 6, 2025, it has generated an impression of over thirty-two thousand views, 1,300 likes, and 825 reposts.
CLAIM
Video shows a French helicopter providing supplies to terrorists
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is MISLEADING!
Screenshot of the claim from X; Insert MISLEADING Verdict
A Google reverse image search on screenshots from the video traced it to a clearer, over four-minute version uploaded on YouTube in 2024 by an Arabic channel, العهد الجديد (al-ahad al-jadid in transliteration).
The clip shared on X corresponds to the portion of the YouTube video that begins at the 2:06 timestamp and runs until the end.
The caption and headline of the video, originally in Arabic, translated to:
“The strongest rescue operation in the Sultanate of Oman.”
The description added:
“A man from Samail fell into Wadi Al-Jinn, but the men of Oman, Mashallah, managed to go down and rescue him despite the difficult terrain. May God protect Oman, its ruler, and its people, and bless their fruitful cooperation.”
Using keywords from the caption led to news reports, as seen here, that confirmed the incident occurred a year ago in Oman, a country located on the southeastern coast of the Arabian Peninsula in West Asia and the Middle East.
THE VERDICT
The claim that a video shows a French helicopter providing supplies to terrorists is misleading; the footage is from a rescue operation by the Oman Police from a year ago.
A claim that under a new tax law, Nigerians would pay N500 as tax on every 10,000 spent on fuel has been circulating on the internet.
The claim has been circulating on the internet since the announcement of the 5 per cent tax on petrol and diesel.
The regulation requires that the surcharge be applied to every supply or sale of refined fossil fuel products in Nigeria, whether locally produced or imported, with the money collected at the point of purchase. Cleaner fuels, such as renewable energy sources, household kerosene, cooking gas (LPG), and compressed natural gas (CNG), are exempt.
A post on X by Naija Pr retrieved by our researcher reads:
Nigerians will pay N500 as tax on every N10,000 they spend on petrol consumption starting from January 2026 under the new tax law.
Since the post’s inception on Wednesday, September 3, 2025, it has garnered over four million views, 21,000 likes, 6,200 reposts, and 3,400 comments.
While the claim of the 5 per cent tax is undeniable, there are doubts as to whether this is a new tax law. Due to the Veracity of the claim, The FactCheckHub decided to fact-check it.
CLAIM
The new tax law introduces a 5 per cent tax on petrol purchases from January 2026.
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is MISLEADING!
Screenshot of the claim; INSERT Misleading Verdict
The levy originates from the newly enacted Nigeria Tax Administration Act, one of four tax reform bills signed into law by President Bola Tinubu on June 26, 2025.
According to the Act, a five per cent surcharge will be applied to chargeable fossil fuel products produced or supplied in Nigeria. The law stipulates that: the surcharge must be collected at the point of sale; it will be calculated based on the retail price of petrol and diesel; the Minister of Finance must formally announce its commencement date through an official Gazette; and it will not apply to kerosene, LPG, CNG, or renewable energy.
The surcharge is not entirely new — a similar provision is contained in the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) Act of 2007, which introduced a fuel levy to fund road maintenance.
According to the substituted Section 14 of the Principal Act, the Fund of the Agency is to be financed through several sources: a take-off grant and annual subventions from the Federal Government; loans and grants from federal, bilateral, and multilateral agencies; internally generated revenues such as rents, fees, and service charges; toll gate collections; proceeds from road concessions; and other sums accruing to the Agency.
It also provides for a 5 per cent user charge on the pump price of petrol and diesel—40 per cent of which is allocated to FERMA and 60 per cent to State Road Maintenance Agencies—as well as international vehicle transit charges determined by the Minister of Transportation
In essence, the Tinubu administration has not introduced a new tax, but rather reactivated an existing provision that had long remained unenforced.
The ICIR also reports that the Minister of Finance, Wale Edun, clarified that the surcharge is not new, while stating that it is not commencing soon.
THE VERDICT
The claim that a new tax law introduces 5 per cent on petrol purchases from January 2026 is misleading; the surcharge is not new, and there is currently no date for its commencement.
POPULAR Nigerian Islamic cleric, Sheikh Ahmed Gumi, has posted a video showing a helicopter descending in a bush with a claim that it shows bandits receiving support in Nigeria.
He posted the claim with a caption :
“The truth has come out!
(The slogan: let them kill themselves)
Here are the bandits enforcing their support. They are not politicians, they are people of Ketare. We are fools, we are just wasting away our brothers’ blood, and we are burning the fire of war. The solution to this is to save the people being used; we show them brotherhood through reconciliation, not war.”
The post has generated over 5000 likes and more than 2000 shares on Facebook as of September 12, 2025.
Video does not show bandit reinforcement in Nigeria.
screenshot of the viral post
FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is MISLEADING.
For over a decade, bandits have terrorised many states in northwestern Nigeria, sacking villages, sexually assaulting women, imposing levies on communities, killing locals, and running a multi-million-dollar kidnap-for-ransom enterprise to sustain their operations.
Since their activities escalated in 2010, more than 13,000 people have been killed. The crisis has also displaced over 600,000 people across Kaduna, Kebbi, Sokoto, Zamfara, Katsina, etc.
The FactCheckHub subjected the keyframes in the viral video to Google Reverse Image search, and the result shows that the video emanates from Sudan.
Several Sudanese pages, such as here and here, had posted the video with the Arabic caption, which reads: “شاهد منهم ينزلون من هليكوبتر في دارفور” and translates to: “Watch them getting off a helicopter in Darfur.”
Darfur is a large region in western Sudan, in northeast Africa.
The region has been one of the hardest-hit regions in the war between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) since April 2023. The RSF controls much of the region, while El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, remains under siege as one of the last major SAF strongholds.
Fighting has devastated civilian areas, with displacement camps, markets, and hospitals repeatedly shelled or bombed. Massacres, sexual violence, and ethnically motivated attacks by RSF and allied militias have been widely reported, raising alarms about possible war crimes.
VERDICT
The claim that the video shows the security situation in Nigeria is MISLEADING. Findings showed that the video emanated from Sudan.
A video showing controversial Biafra agitator, Simon Ekpa, exchanging pleasantries with people has surfaced online with a claim that he has been released from prison.
A Facebook account, Igbo Daily TV, posted the video with a caption: “See how Simon Ekpa was released and his followers were jubilating.”
The post has generated over 7,000 likes and more than 1,000 shares as of September 4, 2025.
CLAIM
Video shows Simon Ekpa after his release from prison.
Screenshot of the viral post
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is MISLEADING.
Ekpa, a dual Finnish-Nigerian national, is a self-proclaimed leader of a faction of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a group that is pushing for the independence of Nigeria’s southeast, where a bloody civil war was fought in the late 1960s.
In November 2024, Simon Ekpa was apprehended in Finland amid terrorism-related investigations. Authorities detained him along with four others on suspicion of inciting violence and financing terrorism through his social media networks.
The Finnish National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) froze his assets and those of his associates and companies linked to him. He was remanded into custody by the District Court of Päijät-Häme on suspicion of public incitement to commit terrorist acts.
Ekpa remained in custody. Checks by The FactCheckHub show that the viral video was shot in June during one of his appearances in the Päijät-Häme District Court.
Many of his followers who had been longing to see him out took the video out of context and started spreading it in Nigeria with a claim that he had been released.
Meanwhile, the last update on the matter was that on September 1, 2025, when the Finnish court convicted Ekpa and sentenced him to six years in prison.
The court found him guilty on all major counts, noting that between August 2021 and November 2024, he used his social media following to incite violence and facilitate the supply of weapons, explosives, and ammunition to separatist groups in Nigeria’s South-East.
The Federal Government of Nigeria and other officials hailed the sentencing as a landmark victory in the fight against terrorism and violent extremism. The Minister of Information, Chief of Defence Staff, and Enugu State Government commended Finnish authorities for their diligence. President Tinubu likewise praised the move, citing it as pivotal in reinforcing Nigeria’s unity and democratic values.
VERDICT
The claim that the video shows Simon Ekpa after release from detention is MISLEADING, as findings show that the Biafran agitator is imprisoned in Finland.
MISLEADING claims about the new tax reforms signed by President Bola Tinubu in June have been circulating online.
The claims asserted that starting in January 2026, Nigerians earning ₦800,000 and above annually will be required to pay personal income tax ranging from 11 to 20 per cent, under President Bola Tinubu’s new tax reforms.
In an Instagram post, blogger Tunde Ednut shared an image that read:
BREAKING Starting January 1 2026, anyone, Nigerian or foreigner, who does business in Nigeria and earns 800,000 or more in a year will have to pay 20% tax on their total yearly income, whether they live in Nigeria or not.
The post also had a caption alongside it that read:
Whether you live in Nigeria or not, so far you do business in Nigeria, you must pay. Wow! See next post….
Since the post was made on Thursday, August 14, 2025, it has garnered over 40,000 likes, 5,661 comments.
Another user on X, @neo_officiall shared the same claim in a post that read:
Tinubu wants to tax Nigerians to death. From January 2026, he wants to be taxing 11%-20% from any Nigerian earning N800k and above annually and we are all quiet?. Bro this is wickedness. At what point do we say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH?.
The post had also gained a significant amount of traction with almost 400,000 views, 4,400 likes, 1,600 reposts and over 300 comments.
CLAIM
From 2026, President Bola Tinubu will introduce a tax of 20 per cent on Nigerians earning ₦800,000 or more annually.
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is MISLEADING!
Screenshot of an appearance of the claim; Insert MISLEADING Verdict
Personal income refers to the total earnings or revenue an individual receives from various sources during a specified period, typically a financial year. It encompasses all the money an individual earns from different activities and sources, both employment-related and non-employment-related.
Tinubu’s tax reforms
President Bola Tinubu’s tax reform process began in July 2023 with the creation of the Presidential Committee on Fiscal Policy and Tax Reforms, led by Taiwo Oyedele.
By October 2024, his administration submitted four tax reform bills to the National Assembly. Lawmakers passed and harmonised them between March and May 2025.
On June 26, 2025, Tinubu signed all four bills into law, introducing sweeping changes to Nigeria’s tax framework.
The new Nigeria Tax Act (NTA) 2025 is intended to take effect from January 1, 2026, subject to the necessary commencement procedures.
For personal income tax, the Act exempts individuals earning ₦800,000 or less annually from paying tax, introduces progressive rates for higher incomes, and retains VAT at 7.5 per cent despite earlier proposals to raise it.
The corporate tax rate for small businesses was also reduced, while VAT revenue-sharing formulas were adjusted.
Under the new personal income tax system, low-income earners who are people earning ₦800,000 or less per annum are fully exempt. But anything above that attracts a tax of various percentages. The highest rate of 25 per cent applies only to individuals earning above ₦50 million annually. The Act also raises the tax exemption threshold for compensation for loss of employment or injury from ₦10 million to ₦50 million. Income tax brackets are now structured as follows:
First ₦800,000: 0%
Next ₦2.2 million: 15%
Next ₦9 million: 18%
Next ₦13 million: 21%
Next ₦25 million: 23%
Above ₦50 million: 25%
Monthly vs annually
When governments set personal income tax, they usually calculate it on an annual basis. This means your total income for a year is assessed, and the tax rate that applies to your income bracket is charged against that total.
However, in practice, tax is often deducted monthly from salaries through a system known as Pay-As-You-Earn (PAYE). Employers calculate what a worker is expected to pay in a year, divide it by 12, and deduct that amount each month.
The viral claims misrepresent the law by treating ₦800,000 as a monthly income, whereas the Nigeria Tax Act sets the exemption threshold at ₦800,000 per year. This means only those earning above ₦800,000 annually face taxation, starting at 15%, not 20%.
Dada Olusegun, Special Assistant to the President, clarified the changes on X, noting that the new system is progressive, ensuring higher earners pay more while low-income earners pay less or none.
Income tax brackets are now structured as follows
Our fact-checker also confirmed these rates using the personal income tax calculator, which aligned with Olusegun’s breakdown and showed the differences between the old and new laws.
The claim that, from 2026, President Bola Tinubu will introduce a 20% tax on Nigerians earning ₦800,000 or more annually is misleading. Under the new Nigeria Tax Act 2025, individuals earning ₦800,000 or less per year are fully exempt from personal income tax. The progressive rates start at 15% for incomes above that threshold, with the highest 25% rate applying only to incomes above ₦50 million.
A claim has surfaced online alleging that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is set to launch the world’s first contraceptive capable of preventing pregnancy for up to eight years in Kenya.
The claim, initially reported by some media platforms in Africa, including Kenya and Nigeria, asserts that the long-term birth control method would offer women an extended family planning option, reducing the need for frequent replacements, and was going to be implemented first in Kenya.
Both platforms attributed the information to the Gates Foundation, quoting Dr. Anita Zaidi, head of its Gender Equality Division, who allegedly said that a new hormonal IUD, designed to be more affordable and user-friendly, was being introduced in Kenya, Nigeria, and possibly India.
The claim also spread to X, where it was posted by @africafactszone and amplified by @UnkleAyo. It has since been widely shared across social media platforms.
The claim read:
Bill Gates’ Foundation is set to launch the world’s first contraceptive that will prevent pregnancy for 8 years in Kenya.
Similarly, @UnkleAyo shared a screenshot of the post with the caption:
Good evening everyone. Please take 10 minutes to read the last 6 posts I tweeted. Then, come back to this tweet. If blinkers aren’t going off in your head, then I don’t know what to say to you. Goodnight.
Since it was posted on August 7, 2025, the claim has garnered over 600,000 views, 8,400 likes, and 2,600 reposts. It has also appeared on Instagram.
CLAIM
The Bill Gates Foundation is set to launch the world’s first contraceptive capable of preventing pregnancy for eight years in Kenya.
THE FINDINGS
Findings by The FactCheckHub show that the claim is FALSE!
Screenshot of an appearance of the claim; Insert FALSE verdict
On August 4, 2025, the Gates Foundation announced a $2.5 billion commitment through 2030 to accelerate research and development focused on women’s health, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.
The foundation noted that the investment will advance innovation across five high-impact areas of a woman’s lifespan: obstetric care and maternal immunisation, maternal health and nutrition, gynaecological and menstrual health, contraceptive innovation, and prevention and treatment of sexually transmitted infections.
Although Anita Zaidi was quoted in the release, a closer examination of the statement shows no point where she specifically said the contraceptives would be launched in Kenya, Nigeria, and India. This was also corroborated by local media outlets such as The Guardian and Nairametrics.
In another article, the Gates Foundation noted that the funding would support research teams globally to advance more than 40 innovative women’s health solutions, such as a self-administered contraceptive patch offering six months of protection, rapid testing for sexually transmitted infections, AI-enabled ultrasound, and vaginal health therapies.
There is no part of the statement where it was explicitly mentioned that the foundation will launch an eight-year contraceptive in Kenya or any other African country.
FactCheckHub also conducted keyword searches online and reviewed Bill Gates’ social media handles but found no mention of such an announcement.
When reached for a response, the Gates Foundation clarified that it is not launching contraceptives in Kenya or elsewhere in Africa, noting that hormonal IUDs have long been available globally and in many African countries, and emphasised that decisions on health products rest with individual governments.
“The Gates Foundation has not, nor is it planning to launch contraceptives in Kenya, or anywhere in Africa. The 8-year contraceptive products are not new in the market. Hormonal IUDs have been available globally for years and were introduced in many African countries nearly a decade ago.
It’s up to each government to decide which health products make the most sense for their people, based on local needs, safety standards, and public health priorities,” the statement read in part.
When contacted on Instagram, one of the authors of the report, Olamilekan Okebiorun, explained that his reference for the claim about contraceptives being implemented in Kenya came from the Gates Foundation’s statement and two Kenyan media reports — one of which originally carried the claim. He added that although several Kenyan outlets had published the story at the time, some later took it down for reasons he could not explain.
“At the time of release, the story was awash across most Kenyan news outlets. Although some have since taken it down, I am not sure why,” he stated.
The Factcheckhub also reached the Kenyan media outlet and the reporter who authored the story to ask for their references but received no response.
Further findings by The FactCheckHubshow that an IUD can prevent pregnancy for up to 10 years depending on the specific type, and this has been in existence for some time.
THE VERDICT
The claim that the Gates Foundation is set to launch the world’s first contraceptive capable of preventing pregnancy for eight years in Kenya is FALSE. The Gates Foundation’s announcement referenced funding for more than 40 women’s health innovations but made no mention of launching such a contraceptive in Kenya or any other African country. Moreover, long-term contraceptives, including IUDs effective for up to 8 years or more, have been in existence for years.
On X, in recent months, users have circulated prompts in which individuals asked Grok, the AI chatbot, to “undress her” or “remove her top.”
In at least two documented cases, the chatbot complied. Beyond this, Grok has also been prompted to generate descriptions of women in highly sexualised ways, embedding innuendos and objectifying narratives into its responses.
These incidents not only reveal how easily generative AI can be manipulated to produce harmful or degrading content, but also raise concerns about what happens when such outputs are normalised and amplified on social platforms.
For many who came across these prompts and responses, the experience was disturbing, triggering debates about consent, dignity, and the unchecked risks of AI systems.
Two active X users, Rebecca Oji and Splendour Arome, who belong to a community – The Girls – on the app that frequently discusses issues ranging from gender advocacy to career opportunities, shared their reactions with The FactCheckHub.
Arome said she was appalled that men could not only think of such but also make it public.
“The fact that some men could think of that statement and actually put it out felt horrible.
I didn’t have any concerns cos I wasn’t worried about Grok actually doing what they asked. It is obviously a clear violation of a lot of laws, so it can’t do it.”
But Arome was wrong. She had underestimated how far the bot will comply with such prompts.
Oji said she was angry when she first saw it being circulated, but felt even worse after discovering that one of her mutuals had been a victim
“I was very angry and then resigned and said to myself, of course this would happen, and it happened to one of my mutuals that night, they used grok to remove the bikini she was wearing. And I was so stunned.”
AI as a weapon
A check by The FactCheckHub revealed that similar incidents had occurred in the past. Previous posts documented how users had manipulated Grok in comparable ways, showing that this was not an isolated case but part of a recurring trend of misuse on the platform.
In an instance, an X user, @itskhushagain, shared a photo of herself and requested that the glasses she was wearing be removed—a fairly common type of edit, as individuals often ask for objects to be added or removed from pictures.
Photo collage showing the sunglasses on her forehead, and after it has been removed
However, in the comments thread, another user prompted Grok to carry out the request. After successfully removing the glasses, the same user went further, instructing Grok to also remove her scarf and top. Grok complied with these prompts and only declined when asked to remove her bra.
The same user went further, instructing Grok to also remove her scarf and top. Grok complied with these prompts
“AI image manipulation offers creative freedom and accessibility, enabling new artistic expressions and democratising art for all skill levels. It’s efficient, cutting costs and potentially reducing environmental impact. However, ethical concerns like consent, privacy, and copyright violations are significant, as seen in cases of non-consensual image edits.
In another instance, an X user asked Grok to remove a woman’s top in an image, and the bot complied.
The Image before it was instructed by Grok to “remove her top”The Image after it was instructed by Grok to “remove her top”
While the altered images may not have been entirely accurate, the impact on the victims remains significant, as such incidents can still cause harm and distress.
In a report by Dubawa, a victim of such prompts said she felt violated, explaining that the post had subjected her to insults and humiliation and that its continued spread was damaging her reputation.
Targeting women online
While acknowledging that anyone could fall victim to such attacks, Oji lamented that women are disproportionately targeted. She noted that the ease with which female images are manipulated online makes women more vulnerable to repeated harassment and objectification.
“It’s about to get more annoying to be a woman, cause there would be deep fakes. Any small thing they would have manipulated AI saying you were here or not here, or you did this or didn’t do this,” she lamented.
Her fear is valid, as similar incidents have emerged in recent times. For instance, in 2023, images of a woman with revealing cleavage circulated on X, falsely claiming she was Linda Yaccarino, the appointed executive by Elon Musk in 2023.
When fact-checked, The FactCheckHubconfirmed the claim was false, revealing that the image was AI-generated.
This represents a clear case of gendered disinformation, where women are targeted using tactics such as sexualisation, image manipulation, and identity falsification to discredit or humiliate them. Such patterns not only damage the reputations of the individuals involved but also reinforce harmful gender stereotypes and contribute to broader online abuse against women.
Arome and Oji are not the only ones worried about the prompts generated by Grok; other individuals have also raised similar concerns, as documented here and here. ( Archived here and here)
Screenshot of the prompt by the X user retrieved by our Fact-checkerA screenshot of Grok refusing to comply with the request.
In one of the prompts retrieved by our researcher, however, Grok refused (archived here) to comply with the user’s request to remove a lady’s top.
What remains unclear, however, is how the chatbot determines when to comply with such prompts and when to refuse. Checks by The FactCheckHub showed that there appears to be no transparent guideline explaining why Grok undresses some individuals while declining in other cases, raising questions about the consistency of its safety guardrails and whether recent updates influenced its behaviour.
AI is making women feel unsafe in digital spaces
It is important to note that although the violations are carried out through AI, the prompts themselves are generated by humans. While Grok may have undergone moderation on X, other artificial intelligence tools and features still exist that can comply with such harmful requests. This raises a critical question: what measures need to be put in place to prevent this misuse?
Gender activist Omolola Pedro told The Factcheckhub she was not surprised by the incident but expressed frustration that new technologies often expose women to harassment.
“Tools like this cause loss of human dignity. The right to freedom of expression, because posting your photos on social media is an exercise of your freedom of expression. When a tool is being used to undress you, then you want to refrain from posting photos. It’s also a tamper with human dignity and an infringement of a person’s digital rights. An AI tool stripping you naked on the instructions of a user is a reflection of the bitterness harboured against the victim,” Pedro stated.
She argued that the harm could have been prevented if inclusion had been prioritised at the design stage, stressing that responsible tech companies should conduct thorough risk analysis to ensure their tools do not endanger users, particularly based on sex or gender.
“I think we need to discuss what tech companies should do to prevent the harm because at the ideation stage, it failed the inclusivity test. Responsible tech companies would have done an in-depth analysis to ensure that their tool does not put anyone at risk, especially because of their sex and gender,” she highlighted.
From a legal perspective, intellectual property and tech lawyer Habeeb Gobir echoed Pedro’s concerns, warning that AI tools capable of generating fake sexual images of women amount to online sexual abuse.
He said, “AI tools like this pose very real risks to human rights. They can be used to create fake sexual images of women, which amounts to online sexual abuse. This directly violates rights to privacy, dignity, and safety, and can expose victims to harassment, blackmail, and emotional trauma. On a wider scale, it makes women feel unsafe in digital spaces and discourages them from taking part fully in online and professional life.”
Where are the regulators?
Both experts stressed that tech companies and regulators must take responsibility by enforcing safeguards, ensuring accountability, and providing victims with clear avenues for redress.
“Tech companies and regulators have a duty to act. Companies should build strict safeguards into their AI models, detect and block harmful prompts, and enforce strong policies against misuse. Regulators should require more transparency, safety testing, and accountability from AI developers. Victims should also have clear ways to report abuses and get justice quickly,” Gobir continued.
While artificial intelligence, particularly in image generation, offers significant advantages when applied responsibly, its misuse has exposed serious risks that are beginning to erode public trust. For some individuals, the dangers already outweigh the benefits. Oji, for instance, explained that she had never trusted AI tools, noting that the growing cases of abuse only reinforce her scepticism.
“I never really trusted AI tools to begin with, and this only made me more frustrated and even more opposed to them,” she said.
Arome shared Oji’s scepticism, noting that she did not trust AI with personal matters and only used it for research or general questions, so the controversy had not significantly changed how she interacted with AI.
What must be done
This sentiment reflects a broader concern among users who feel that the technology, when left unchecked, creates more harm than good, especially in contexts where it amplifies harassment or strips people of their dignity.
Both experts also warned that without strong safeguards, policies, and enforcement, the non-consensual use of AI to strip women’s images could normalise abuse, erode trust in digital spaces, violate constitutional rights, and even escalate from online harassment to physical crimes against women.
Gobir noted that Nigeria’s constitutional and legal frameworks, alongside international treaties, already provide grounds to punish the non-consensual use of AI to strip women’s images
“In Nigeria, the Constitution protects the dignity and privacy of every person. Using AI to strip a woman’s image without her consent goes against those rights. Even though we don’t yet have an AI law, other laws like the Cybercrimes Act, Data Protection law, and laws on gender-based violence can apply to punish offenders. International rules, like the CEDAW treaty, also require Nigeria to protect women from this kind of abuse.”
Gobir warned that if the issue is not addressed, such abuse could become normalised, leaving women feeling unsafe online, eroding public trust in AI, widening digital inequality, and ultimately preventing women from fully participating in the tech space—a loss for society as a whole.
Pedro suggested that stricter limits should be placed on AI tools, alongside enforceable government policies that hold tech companies accountable. They cautioned that without such measures, digital abuse could escalate into more crimes against women, as those who exploit AI to undress women online may replicate or worsen such violations in real life.
“Long-term consequences will be an increase in crimes against women. AI introduced a different level of abuse. They’ll translate to the physical. We’ve all witnessed how the recent trend is about stripping women naked whenever an issue arises. Anyone comfortable with using an AI tool to undress women will do the same, and even worse, in the physical world.” Pedro concluded
This report was produced with support from the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development (CJID) and Luminate
