Drop Press Regulation Bill, Media Leaders Tell House

*No court can stop us, lawmakers reply

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), yesterday
called on the House of Representatives to step down a bill seeking
to amend the Nigerian Press Council Act as the matter is sub
judice.

The media organisations and other groups also criticised the
various clauses in the bill, saying that they will discourage
freedom of speech and the press.

The representative of the NPO, Mr. Azubuike Ishiekwene, who is
also the Editor-in-chief of Leadership Newspapers, said at a public
hearing on the Bill for an Act to Amend the NPC Act, organised by
the House Committee on Information, National Orientation, Ethics
and Values, in Abuja, that there is a matter before the Supreme
Court on the Act.

But the Chairman of the Committee, Hon. Olusegun Odebunmi, said
no court could stop the National Assembly from performing its
constitutional role.

Ishiekwene said: “There is a matter, and I am sure as the
stewards of the people and stewards of the law you are aware that
there is a pending matter between NPO and some parties being called
in this legislation.

“There is a matter pending before the Supreme Court between NPAN
and some parties involved in this bill that is being amended. And
as stewards of the law, I’m sure you are constrained just as I am
to make any further conversation on this matter because it is a
pending matter and it is before the Supreme Court.”

Ishiekwene said the case had been in court since 1999.

He stated that the last time the matter came up in 2010, 17 of
the 39 clauses contained in the bill being considered in the new
amendment were declared unconstitutional by the court at that
time.

Ishiekwene added: “Of course, the federal government has
appealed the ruling and the matter is currently before the Supreme
Court. So, I will rest my case by appealing to the honourable
members of this committee to refer to the conversation that was had
on a similar matter in 2018 when this matter came up before the
Senate and the pendency of this matter before the court was
canvassed and the 8th National Assembly at that time agreed that
the prudent thing to do was to step it down. I urge this House to
also, consider a similar step.”

However, Odebunmi said the committee had the mandate of
Nigerians to amend any law.

He added: “And that is what we are doing. It is not about the
matter being in court or not.

“To the best of my knowledge, constitutionally, we are doing our
own job and I am very sure no court will restrain us from doing the
job.”

He stated that the amendment does not prevent the parties
involved from pursuing the case in court, adding: “This is the
position of the National Assembly.”

Earlier in his opening remark, Odebunmi had said the committee
tried its best to get all stakeholders to attend the public hearing
of the bills.

He said: “I want to categorically state that we tried to do our
best in getting all the stakeholders invited, but some said we
couldn’t reach them. Notwithstanding, we are all human beings and
we are bound to make mistakes. It was published in the daily news
and announced on Radio Nigeria that cut across all the federation
and even on social media platforms. And I’m sure that’s why we have
this kind of audience. I’m sorry if anybody thinks we didn’t invite
them but it’s not by intention.”

However, media development organisations expressed worry that
the proposed amendment to the Nigerian Press Council Act falls far
short of the expectations of the type of legislative paths Nigeria
would pursue to expand the frontiers of press freedom.

Presenting a joint memorandum on behalf of various
organisations, including International Press Centre (IPC), Media
Rights Agenda (MRA), Centre for Media Law and Advocacy, and Premium
Times Centre for Investigative Journalism, the Executive Director,
IPC, Mr. Lanre Arogundade, said it was not that regulation was not
necessary, especially in this age of fake news and hate speech.

He stated that regulations must not erode media independence or
freedom and are not unduly punitive.

According to him, the regulator must also be free of the
stranglehold of the powers that be, political or other interests,
so that it can judiciously adjudicate in matters bordering on the
infringement of the code of ethics of journalism.

He added that the amendment seeks to restrict freedom of
expression.

Arogundade added that the amendment attempted to do what other
laws have done like the Cybercrimes Acts which Sections 24 and 38,
which in no fewer than 10 instances have been used to clamp down on
bloggers or journalists for expressing opinion antagonistic to
politically or economically powerful elites.

He stated that bodies like Amnesty International have documented
50 cases where the law had targeted, not cybercrime suspects, but
bloggers and journalists for writing on what they “know to be
false, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience danger,
obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred,
ill will or needless anxiety to another.”

He described the penalties for offences as stipulated in Section
(3) i & ii of the proposed amendment, including a fine of N5
million or three years imprisonment, as being too punitive, saying
it will threaten media independence and freedom.

Arogundade also criticised Section 17 (3)( a & b), 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, saying that it is punitive.

He decried that Section 33 (3) and (4) 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.

Arogundade recommended that the committee should take a cue from
the Ghanaian constitution by recommending the inclusion of the
provision for press freedom in the constitution while it should
also recommend that government should not appoint managers of the
public (state) media.

He added that the board should have management control over the
commission, including the executive secretary and the appointment
should be made by the President through the confirmation of the
National Assembly

Arogundade said the composition and functions of the Council and
the philosophy of the bill all run counter to international best
practice and urged the committee to treat it by rejection.

He suggested that the provision relating to revocation of
licence for alleged publication of fake news should be removed from
the Act, adding that decisions for appropriate sanctions in
relation to such offences should be vested in the court.

In his presentation, the Executive Secretary, Nigeria Press
Council, Mr. Francis Nwosu, commended the section of the bill that
seeks to empower the executive secretary of the council to issue a
summons, saying it would enhance the council’s effectiveness and
efficiency in handling complaints.

He suggested that the name executive secretary should be changed
to director-general to be in tandem with other agencies under the
supervision of the Ministry of Information and Culture.

He added that the inclusion of fake News was a welcome
development but that the proposed amendment should define what will
constitute fake news for easy interpretation.

*No court can stop us, lawmakers reply

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), yesterday
called on the House of Representatives to step down a bill seeking
to amend the Nigerian Press Council Act as the matter is sub
judice.

The media organisations and other groups also criticised the
various clauses in the bill, saying that they will discourage
freedom of speech and the press.

The representative of the NPO, Mr. Azubuike Ishiekwene, who is
also the Editor-in-chief of Leadership Newspapers, said at a public
hearing on the Bill for an Act to Amend the NPC Act, organised by
the House Committee on Information, National Orientation, Ethics
and Values, in Abuja, that there is a matter before the Supreme
Court on the Act.

But the Chairman of the Committee, Hon. Olusegun Odebunmi, said
no court could stop the National Assembly from performing its
constitutional role.

Ishiekwene said: “There is a matter, and I am sure as the
stewards of the people and stewards of the law you are aware that
there is a pending matter between NPO and some parties being called
in this legislation.

“There is a matter pending before the Supreme Court between NPAN
and some parties involved in this bill that is being amended. And
as stewards of the law, I’m sure you are constrained just as I am
to make any further conversation on this matter because it is a
pending matter and it is before the Supreme Court.”

Ishiekwene said the case had been in court since 1999.

He stated that the last time the matter came up in 2010, 17 of
the 39 clauses contained in the bill being considered in the new
amendment were declared unconstitutional by the court at that
time.

Ishiekwene added: “Of course, the federal government has
appealed the ruling and the matter is currently before the Supreme
Court. So, I will rest my case by appealing to the honourable
members of this committee to refer to the conversation that was had
on a similar matter in 2018 when this matter came up before the
Senate and the pendency of this matter before the court was
canvassed and the 8th National Assembly at that time agreed that
the prudent thing to do was to step it down. I urge this House to
also, consider a similar step.”

However, Odebunmi said the committee had the mandate of
Nigerians to amend any law.

He added: “And that is what we are doing. It is not about the
matter being in court or not.

“To the best of my knowledge, constitutionally, we are doing our
own job and I am very sure no court will restrain us from doing the
job.”

He stated that the amendment does not prevent the parties
involved from pursuing the case in court, adding: “This is the
position of the National Assembly.”

Earlier in his opening remark, Odebunmi had said the committee
tried its best to get all stakeholders to attend the public hearing
of the bills.

He said: “I want to categorically state that we tried to do our
best in getting all the stakeholders invited, but some said we
couldn’t reach them. Notwithstanding, we are all human beings and
we are bound to make mistakes. It was published in the daily news
and announced on Radio Nigeria that cut across all the federation
and even on social media platforms. And I’m sure that’s why we have
this kind of audience. I’m sorry if anybody thinks we didn’t invite
them but it’s not by intention.”

However, media development organisations expressed worry that
the proposed amendment to the Nigerian Press Council Act falls far
short of the expectations of the type of legislative paths Nigeria
would pursue to expand the frontiers of press freedom.

Presenting a joint memorandum on behalf of various
organisations, including International Press Centre (IPC), Media
Rights Agenda (MRA), Centre for Media Law and Advocacy, and Premium
Times Centre for Investigative Journalism, the Executive Director,
IPC, Mr. Lanre Arogundade, said it was not that regulation was not
necessary, especially in this age of fake news and hate speech.

He stated that regulations must not erode media independence or
freedom and are not unduly punitive.

According to him, the regulator must also be free of the
stranglehold of the powers that be, political or other interests,
so that it can judiciously adjudicate in matters bordering on the
infringement of the code of ethics of journalism.

He added that the amendment seeks to restrict freedom of
expression.

Arogundade added that the amendment attempted to do what other
laws have done like the Cybercrimes Acts which Sections 24 and 38,
which in no fewer than 10 instances have been used to clamp down on
bloggers or journalists for expressing opinion antagonistic to
politically or economically powerful elites.

He stated that bodies like Amnesty International have documented
50 cases where the law had targeted, not cybercrime suspects, but
bloggers and journalists for writing on what they “know to be
false, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience danger,
obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred,
ill will or needless anxiety to another.”

He described the penalties for offences as stipulated in Section
(3) i & ii of the proposed amendment, including a fine of N5
million or three years imprisonment, as being too punitive, saying
it will threaten media independence and freedom.

Arogundade also criticised Section 17 (3)( a & b), 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, saying that it is punitive.

He decried that Section 33 (3) and (4) 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.

Arogundade recommended that the committee should take a cue from
the Ghanaian constitution by recommending the inclusion of the
provision for press freedom in the constitution while it should
also recommend that government should not appoint managers of the
public (state) media.

He added that the board should have management control over the
commission, including the executive secretary and the appointment
should be made by the President through the confirmation of the
National Assembly

Arogundade said the composition and functions of the Council and
the philosophy of the bill all run counter to international best
practice and urged the committee to treat it by rejection.

He suggested that the provision relating to revocation of
licence for alleged publication of fake news should be removed from
the Act, adding that decisions for appropriate sanctions in
relation to such offences should be vested in the court.

In his presentation, the Executive Secretary, Nigeria Press
Council, Mr. Francis Nwosu, commended the section of the bill that
seeks to empower the executive secretary of the council to issue a
summons, saying it would enhance the council’s effectiveness and
efficiency in handling complaints.

He suggested that the name executive secretary should be changed
to director-general to be in tandem with other agencies under the
supervision of the Ministry of Information and Culture.

He added that the inclusion of fake News was a welcome
development but that the proposed amendment should define what will
constitute fake news for easy interpretation.