Cybercrime in Nigeria: Police Arrest Suspect Over Fake OPay Notice

The Nigeria Police Force National Cybercrime Centre (NPF-NCCC) has arrested a suspect over the creation and circulation of a fraudulent document falsely claiming that OPay Digital Services Limited was shutting down its operations in Nigeria.

The police said the suspect, identified as Hafsat Abubakar, was arrested on September 4, 2026, after a digital forensic investigation traced the document to an X account allegedly operated by her.

The false notice reportedly circulated online and claimed that OPay would stop processing transactions and account-related services from September 1. It also urged customers to withdraw their money.

OPay subsequently rejected the claim and said the notice was false.

The case highlights how fabricated digital documents can be used to spread false information about financial platforms and potentially create fear among customers.

How the investigation started

According to the police, OPay submitted a formal petition on August 31, 2026, requesting an investigation into the origin and circulation of the purported shutdown notice.

The petition was submitted through the office of the Deputy Inspector-General of Police in charge of the Force Criminal Investigation Department in Abuja.

The Nigeria Police Force National Cybercrime Centre then began investigating the document.

Rather than relying only on the content of the message, investigators used digital forensic methods to examine the material and trace its apparent source.

The police said the investigation eventually linked the document to an X account allegedly registered to and operated by Abubakar.

Police arrest suspect

The NPF-NCCC said its operatives arrested Abubakar on September 4.

Police spokesperson Ani Iniedu said the suspect was a 27-year-old woman and a graduate of Library and Information Science from Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.

The police also said three Apple iPhones were recovered from the suspect as exhibits.

The devices are expected to form part of the digital evidence being examined as investigators establish the circumstances surrounding the creation and dissemination of the alleged fraudulent notice.

The arrest does not establish criminal guilt. Any allegation against the suspect remains subject to investigation and due process.

What the fake notice claimed

The document circulated online as though it were an official communication from OPay.

According to reports of the police investigation, it falsely claimed that OPay would stop processing transactions and account-related services from September 1, 2026.

The message also advised customers to withdraw their funds.

Such a message can potentially cause customers to make hurried financial decisions, particularly when it appears to come from a company they already use.

OPay moved to reassure customers that its operations had not been suspended.

OPay said the notice was fake

The fintech company rejected the purported announcement and described it as false.

The company also pointed to inconsistencies in the document, including the use of an outdated logo and discrepancies in its corporate name and other features that did not correspond with its genuine communications.

The episode demonstrates why customers should not automatically trust a document simply because it contains a familiar company logo or appears to resemble an official announcement.

Digital fraud can involve the imitation of legitimate brands as well as the theft of money or personal information.

Why digital forensics matters

The investigation also illustrates the role of digital forensics in modern cybercrime investigations.

Digital forensic investigators can examine electronic devices, online accounts, files and other digital evidence to establish how a piece of content was created, stored or distributed.

In this case, the police said forensic analysis helped investigators trace the purported OPay notice to an X account.

The precise evidence that will ultimately be presented in any legal proceedings will depend on the outcome of the investigation.

Fake company announcements can create financial risks

False announcements involving financial institutions can have consequences beyond misinformation.

Customers who believe that a payment platform is about to shut down could attempt to withdraw funds, transfer money to another account or respond to instructions provided by the person behind the false message.

That creates opportunities for secondary scams.

For example, a fraudster could circulate a fake shutdown notice and then direct worried customers to a fraudulent website or account supposedly created to help them recover or transfer their money.

The OPay case did not establish that such a secondary scheme occurred, but the potential risk explains why customers should verify financial announcements through official channels.

Customers should verify alarming financial messages

The incident provides a practical reminder for users of digital financial services.

When a message claims that a bank, fintech company or payment platform is shutting down or changing its services, customers should verify it before taking financial action.

Useful checks include:

• visiting the company’s official website;
• checking the company’s verified social-media accounts;
• using the company’s official customer-service channels;
• checking reputable news organisations for confirmation; and
• avoiding links contained in unexpected messages.

Customers should also avoid entering passwords, card details, PINs or one-time passwords into websites reached through unverified messages.

Social media can accelerate false information

The alleged OPay notice was circulated online before the police investigation traced its reported source.

Social-media platforms can allow false information to spread rapidly because users can repost or forward material without verifying its origin.

A document may also appear credible when it has been shared by several people.

However, repetition does not establish authenticity.

Users should check whether the supposed issuing organisation has published the same announcement through an official channel.

Digital identity can also be misused

The case demonstrates another aspect of cybercrime: the misuse of a person’s or organisation’s identity in digital communications.

The alleged fraudulent notice was presented as though it came from OPay.

Identity impersonation can be used to mislead customers, manipulate employees, solicit money or distribute malicious links.

For businesses, protecting their brand and communicating clearly through verified channels can therefore form part of their broader cybersecurity strategy.

The case is different from hacking into an account

Not every cybercrime involves breaking into a computer system.

Cybercrime can include a range of conduct involving computers, networks and digital communications.

These can include:

• unauthorised access;
• phishing;
• identity theft;
• impersonation;
• malicious software;
• online fraud;
• manipulation of digital information; and
• distribution of fraudulent electronic communications.

The alleged OPay notice falls into the broader category of digital deception and misuse of electronic communication.

It should not automatically be described as a hacking incident because the police announcement does not establish that the suspect hacked into OPay’s computer systems.

EFCC is also handling cybercrime-related cases

The Police investigation comes as other Nigerian law-enforcement agencies continue to pursue cybercrime cases.

In September, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission arraigned Osaretin Osagiede before the Lagos State High Court over alleged unauthorised access to computer material and receiving stolen property valued at ₦700 million.

The EFCC alleged that Osagiede and another suspect, Zacharia Lorshe, who is currently at large, bypassed the two-factor authentication system of Ravenpay user accounts to gain unauthorised access to bank data.

Osagiede was arraigned on a three-count charge.

The case is separate from the OPay investigation and should not be treated as part of the same operation.

Why two-factor authentication is important

The Ravenpay case also illustrates why account-security measures such as two-factor authentication are important.

Two-factor authentication requires an additional verification step beyond a password.

However, the EFCC’s allegation in the Ravenpay case shows that attackers may attempt to circumvent additional security measures rather than simply guessing passwords.

Users should therefore treat two-factor authentication as an important security layer, while also remaining alert to phishing, social engineering and suspicious account activity.

Cybercrime investigations do not establish guilt

Both the police investigation involving the alleged OPay notice and the separate EFCC case illustrate the importance of precise reporting.

An arrest means that law-enforcement authorities have taken a person into custody in connection with an investigation.

It does not mean that a court has found the person guilty.

Similarly, an allegation contained in a charge is not the same as a judicial finding.

Any final determination of criminal responsibility must follow the appropriate legal process.

Businesses also need strong communication channels

The incident has implications for companies operating digital services.

Businesses can reduce confusion during a crisis by maintaining clearly identifiable official communication channels.

When customers know where to find verified announcements, they may be less likely to rely on screenshots or forwarded messages.

Companies can also educate customers about common fraud techniques and explain how genuine communications differ from suspicious messages.

This is particularly relevant for financial technology companies because false information about account access or service availability can quickly create concern among customers.

What users should do when they receive a suspicious notice

People who receive an alarming financial announcement should avoid immediately forwarding it.

Instead, they can:

1. Check the company’s official website.
2. Look for an announcement from a verified company account.
3. Contact official customer support.
4. Avoid clicking links in the suspicious message.
5. Never provide passwords, PINs or one-time passwords in response.
6. Save the message if it appears to be fraudulent.
7. Report suspected fraud to the relevant platform and law-enforcement authorities where appropriate.

Taking these steps can reduce the chance of becoming involved in a secondary scam.

What happens next in the OPay investigation?

The police investigation remains ongoing.

The NPF-NCCC is expected to examine the recovered devices and other available digital evidence as investigators establish the circumstances surrounding the alleged creation and distribution of the false document.

The outcome of that investigation will determine whether further action is taken.

At this stage, the confirmed development is the arrest announced by the police and the recovery of three iPhones as exhibits.

A wider warning about digital fraud

The OPay incident shows how cybercrime can involve more than stealing money directly from a victim’s account.

A fraudulent electronic document can be used to impersonate a legitimate company and influence how customers behave.

For users, verification is an important first line of defence.

For companies, maintaining clear official communication channels and responding quickly to false information can help reduce confusion.

For law-enforcement agencies, digital forensic capabilities provide tools for tracing the origin and distribution of suspicious online material.

As Nigeria’s financial services increasingly depend on digital platforms, incidents involving fraudulent online communications are likely to remain an important cybersecurity concern.

For now, the OPay case remains an investigation, and the allegations against the arrested suspect have not been established by a court.