By Emeka Alex Duru
It is good that the Nigerian Press Organisation, (NPO), comprising the Newspaper Proprietors’ Association of Nigeria (NPAN), the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE) and the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), has challenged the House of Representatives to step down a Bill seeking to amend the Nigerian Press Council Act, as the matter is still a subject of litigation at the Supreme Court.
The intended law is a ‘Bill for an Act to Amend the Nigerian Press Council Act, CAP N128, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, to remove bottlenecks affecting its performance and make the council in tune with current realities in regulating the press and for related matters (HB 330)”. The bill is sponsored by Rep Odebunmi Olusegun.
The bill intends to regulate the print media and related media houses, impose sanctions on perceived areas of infringement, including fines and terms of imprisonment against journalists and media houses. Several media organisations and groups have rightly criticised various clauses in the bill, arguing that they have the tendency of discouraging freedom of speech and press in the country.
The move by the NPO is commendable. This is a matter that has been in court since 1999. Again, 17 of the 39 clauses contained in the bill have already been ruled unconstitutional by the court. The Federal Government, out of dissatisfaction, took it up with the Appeal Court where it lost, leading to the pending appeal at the Supreme Court. The government cannot therefore be a judge in its own case.
There are many considerations that work against the surreptitious re-introduction of the bill. Democracy is about rule of law and separation of powers among the principal arms of the government – the executive, legislature and judiciary. Each is bound to respect the others. For the House of Representatives to proceed with the amendment of the bill on a matter before the Supreme Court, is a slight on the judiciary and a subtle invitation to anarchy. Lawmakers cannot afford to act as law breakers.
Besides, there are various clauses in the new bill that are likely to discourage freedom of speech and press in the country. These contentious clauses need to be critically examined, if the process of the amendment must go on. But for whatever reasons, the regulations must not erode media independence or freedom and should not be unduly punitive. For instance, the penalties for offences as stipulated in some sections of the proposed amendment, including a fine of N5 million or three years’ imprisonment, are too punitive and may threaten media independence and freedom.
Section 33 (3) and (4) of the proposed amendment which does not give room for retraction or apology where fake news is mistakenly published but recommends a blanket sanction of up to N10 million or closure for a period of one year or both, is equally draconian. In like manner, a section of the bill which provides that a journalist could be held liable for the offence committed by his or her organisation and can be made to pay a fine of N250,000, is anachronistic, to put it mildly.
There should be negotiated discussion between the lawmakers and the various stakeholders in the Nigerian media on the intended law. Rather than emasculating the media with the new bill, it is expected that the National Assembly should expunge all laws intended to criminalise free speech and press in the country.
The role of the press in national development and ensuring stable polity is well established over the ages. We may not bother recalling the sacrifices made by the press and practitioners in winning Nigeria’s independence from Britain and in attaining the present democracy in the land. The Nigerian press has come a long way in fostering change in the society and nation building through its traditional functions of informing, educating and entertaining the people.
As a principle, the media holds power to account, by acting as the public watchdog overseeing the activities of the government and its institutions. To achieve this, it must enjoy complete independence from government. Freedom of the press in this sense, is freedom from restriction which the new bill intends to institute.
A free press gives the people a voice in governance and acts as check on the excesses of the government. This is why the press is commonly referred to as the fourth estate of the realm. A system without robust press is akin to dictatorship. The powers of the press should not be diminished or compromised by any arm of the government.
We agree with the profound observations of accomplished media writer, J. Curran that; “Once the media becomes subject to public regulation, it will lose its bite as a watchdog and may even be transformed into a snarling Rottweiler in the service of the State”. This is a call for dictatorship.
The role of the media in ensuring an equitable Nigeria is eloquently stated in section 22 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as part of the fundamental objective and directive principles of the state policy. Among other responsibilities, the section charges the media with not only the duty to discharge its traditional watchdog function in all aspects of governance but also in guarding and advancing the frontiers of the people’s liberties and freedom.
It also assigns to the media the obligation of seeing itself as the policing institution over the fundamental objectives and direct principles of state policy as well as the citizens’ fundamental Rights. This implies that it should exercise vigilance on the relationship between the government and the people. From whatever angle it is looked at, this is a huge role the press has been saddled with in the evolution of the Nigerian state and it has not been an easy task. It is particularly so in a democratic setting where the media is seen as the voice of the masses.
For the Press in Nigeria to accomplish this role, it must be free from manipulation or undue restriction by the state. The cliché that the quality of a nation’s mass media is a reflection of the level of its development, is true, at all time. Nigeria cannot afford to recline to the military authoritarian era where suppression of the press was the norm. Doing so in whatever guise under a civilian arrangement, will be catastrophic to the development of the country.
In the event of infraction by the journalists, the courts are there to make the necessary pronouncements, including award of fines. Extant laws of the land are enough to take care of perceived malfeasance by the practitioners. The House of Representatives should not resort to self-help, for any reasons, pleading legislative independence.
Nobody, of course, is holding brief for media houses or employees on the path of irresponsibility and recklessness. If anything, practitioners should at all-time bear in mind the fundamental role of the press in national security and corporate existence of the country. Many countries are known to have been thrown into crises by indiscretions of some media practitioners.
In this era of citizen journalism, measures should be put in place by various press bodies and organisations to guide the activities of practitioners. The disciplinary organs of the NPAN, NGE and the NUJ, should be alert and ensure that the ethics and conducts regulating media practice in the country are strictly enforced among the members.
*DURU is the Editor, TheNiche Newspapers, Lagos (08054103327, nwaukpala@yahoo.com)