The renewed efforts by senior lawmakers to gag the mass media will go the way of their previous efforts and end up as an exercise in futility. The reasons are too glaring for the politically discerning to see.
Among many professions in Nigeria, the mass media and the press or more appropriately, journalism, is the only profession constitutionally empowered to discharge a governance mandate in the country. That is to hold the government accountable to the people.
Recall that Section 22 of the 1999 Constitution, on the obligations of the mass media, states that, “the press, radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the government to the people.” The italicised words are for emphasis.
It is also instructive that this mandate is placed in Chapter 2 of the Constitution under the Fundamental Objectives And Directive Principles of State policy, which also details the obligation of government to the security and welfare of the people, while acknowledging in Section 14 (2, a) “that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom the government through this Constitution derives all its powers and authority.”
In one fell swoop, therefore, the Constitution bestows on the mass media a sacred duty to act as a sort of spiritual guardian to society, mirroring it to itself so that through introspection, the people can operate according to the principles of democracy and social justice.
It is in this sense that the mass media is described as the Fourth Estate of the Realm, meaning as a mediator in governance and not as an extension of government. The former deals with participation, which is inclusive and democratic, while the latter deals with officialdom and bureaucracy, an exclusive and elitist thing.
The operational words here are participation, inclusiveness and representation.
It is against this background that we fault the recent solo efforts by the Hon. Odebunmi Olusegun Dotun-led House of Representative Committee on Information, National Orientation, Ethics and Values to amend the Acts of the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) and the Nigeria Press Organisation (NPO), among others.
Sponsoring bills to amend the Acts of regulatory media organisations without full participation of relevant stakeholders at every stage, as Hon. Dotun has done, is, to say the least, unbecoming of an elected lawmaker. The committee made scant attempt at consultation; no time to allow for proposals from stakeholders and worse, the Nigeria Press Organisation, comprising the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), the Newspapers Proprietors Association of Nigeria (NPAN) and the Nigerian Guild of Editors, has a pending case at the Supreme Court on the Nigeria Press Council.
In fact, when Mr Azubuike Ishiekwene, Editor-In-Chief of Leadership Newspaper, who represented the NPO at the public hearing, drew the attention of the committee to the fact that the NPC case was still subjudice, considering that the Federal Government had appealed the ruling of an Appeal Court that struck down 17 clauses in the NPO Act as unconstitutional, Dotun and another member of the committee, Tajudeen Obasa, disregarded the information.
Ishiekwene pressed his point that when a similar move was made by the Senate some time ago, the NPO raised the same objection and the Senate apologised and stepped down the amendment, pending the ruling of the apex court.
Instructively, Dotun said repeatedly that the NPO was a baby of the government, while Obasa adlibs him thus: “NPO is a baby of government and there is nothing you can do about it.” Such disregard for the rule of law and a show of lack of recognition of the judiciary, an independent third-arm of government!
Obviously, this committee is following the inglorious footsteps of the previous personal bills on fake news, anti-social media bill, first proposed in 2015 but killed when Nigerians kicked against it and was re-introduced in 2019 by Senator Mohammed Sani Musa from Niger State. The bill, ‘Protection from Internet Falsehood and Manipulations Bill 2019’, which was a duplication of existing laws, was also kicked against.
We urge the Reps committee to consult widely and give sufficient notification to stakeholders to make their contributions pending the legal pronouncement on the NPC case and the involved legislative processes to make the bill become law.
We support the main position of the NPO, which is that the mass media stakeholders should be allowed to regulate themselves within acceptable boundaries of law and good governance. That is the trend in democracies the world over, except in a dictatorship.
Without the mass media, the activities of government would go unreported, too.
While we support regulation, we kick against laws that are punitive, censorial exclusive so that the profession shall be free at all times to discharge its constitutional mandate to report the activities of the governed and the governors, which contributes to effective national dialogue and communication without which any humane society cannot function properly. Anything less would amount to an exercise in futility.
