To divert the people’s attention from misrule, Roman emperors organised bawdy games in rowdy arenas where bloodlust found expression in deadly gladiator fights.
The Nigerian government has evolved a more sinister approach, it wants to squelch every dissenting voice even as it seeks to burrow into the ground after setting the bar of governance so low it is practically on the ground.
In the proposed amendments to the Nigerian Press Council Act, the Nigerian president will appoint the board and members who will issue licences to newspapers and online outlets, write a press code, and jail journalists and media houses who violate it.
After banning social media microblogging site, Twitter, the Nigerian government is coming for the press to muzzle the last bastion of criticism against inept leadership.
The current set of servile lawmakers, some of the most craven ever seen in Nigeria’s democratic experience, is gearing up to review the Nigerian Press Council Act despite a pending Supreme Court case over some proposals in the 2018 amendment attempt that violated constitutional provisions.
Olusegun Odebunmi, a lawmaker representing Ogo-Oluwa/Surulere Federal Constituency of Oyo State, is once again leading the campaign to muzzle the press through an amendment to the Press Council Bill.
He has the support of Nigeria’s information minister, Lai Muhammed, who rode into power on the crest of disinformation and patent-worthy smear campaign against the previous administration. Now he is getting a taste of his own pudding, he croons about national cohesion.
Odebunmi, it must be recalled, was also the lawmaker behind last year’s obnoxious bill to amend Section 308 of Nigeria’s Constitution to extend Immunity to lawmakers.
Ironically, many of his colleagues even from the same party opposed the bill, including the speaker of the House, Femi Gbajabiamila, who said he would only support the proposal if it would take effect from 2023 after the end of the tenure of the current leadership.
But it was a dubious exercise since lawmakers were already covered by parliamentary immunity under the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, 2018, which means they are immune from civil or criminal proceedings for anything they say in parliament.
Odebunmi and some of his colleagues resolved to take the bill to Nigerians through a public hearing. In a country where many are calling for the withdrawal of immunity granted to governors and the president due to widespread abuse, a public hearing is not expected to produce a different outcome.
The Nigerian Press Council Act Cap N128 LFN 2004 was first enacted in 1992 to repeal the Nigerian Media Council Act 1988 and established the Nigerian Press Council (NPC).
Under this Act, the NPC is recognised as the body charged with the responsibility of overseeing the activities of the Nigerian press.
Some have criticised the body as being inadequate to respond to current challenges with false news and unethical practice, but what obtains in many democracies is self-regulation as well as laws against libel for published material that is injurious and slander for broadcast materials that impugn the reputation of others.
Nigeria seeks to criminalise what is essentially a civil matter. It started with the 2015 Cybercrimes Act in which Section 24 criminalises messages or other matters sent using computer systems or networks by a person, which he knows to be false.
“It also qualifies the motive as “for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, destruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill-will or needless anxiety to another,” said Chudo Nwakanma, chief executive of Blueflower Limited, a communications firm, in a column.
Offenders could be jailed for a term of 10 years and or a minimum fine of N25 million.
The Cybercrimes Act 2015 creates a situation of double jeopardy. There are now two laws in the Statute books on defamation, one civil and the other criminal.
In the proposed amendment to the Nigerian Press Council, the Buhari government is seeking to criminalise journalists and the practice of journalism, become a regulator for journalism and journalism training, and determine who could practice the profession, the responsibility of the National Universities Commission and the Nigerian Broadcasting Commission.
The Bill appears to be a subtle crossbreed of the obnoxious military decrees: the Public Officers (protection Against False Information) Decree No.4 of 1984 enacted under then Head of State, Major General Muhammadu Buhari, and the Newspapers Registration Decree No.43 of 1993. Incidentally, the former military ruler is now the elected president.
The proposed bill is unconstitutional as it runs against the principles and tenets of the Rule of Law and seeks to incapacitate the media in the exercise of the duties and obligations imposed on it by section 22 of the Constitution to hold the government accountable to the people.
The bill seeks for the Nigeria Press Council to usurp the powers of the courts by assuming extra-judicial powers and unduly interfere with the operations of the media in Nigeria as businesses registered under the relevant laws of the federation.
Opposition
It is dangerous for the government to regulate an institution created by the Constitution to hold it accountable. The press when it functions right, keeps politicians honest, shines a light on their worst instinct, and warns of impending dangers and helps the public understand the world better.
The Nigerian Press Organisation (NPO) comprising the Newspapers Proprietors Association of Nigeria (NPAN), the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE), and the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ) have told lawmakers to shelve the bill.
The organisation objected to the bill during a public hearing on the bill last Thursday organised by the House Committee on Information, Culture, Ethics, and Values. Seventeen out of the 39 clauses in the bill are parts of litigation since 1999.
However, in his response, Odubunmi said the court process would not stop the committee from discharging its constitutional function of making laws.
A coalition of civil society organisations comprising, Premium Times Centre For Investigative Journalism (PTCIJ), Media Rights Agenda (MRA), International Press Centre (IPC), and the Centre for Media Law and Advocacy in a joint memorandum, also highlighted some clauses in the bill.
Lanre Arogundade, executive director of IPC, at the public hearing, urged the committee to adopt the paths of Ghana and South Africa in the formulation of laws on media.
“Section 33 (3) and (4) does not give room for retraction and apology where a fake news is mistakenly published but recommends a blanket sanction up to N10 million or closure for a period of one year or both.”
