Controversy trails new media law

Against this background, another journalist who is also a policy maker felt she should contribute to development of her profession. For fifteen years, Mrs Abike Dabiri-Erewa reported news and aired views on Nigeria Television Authority before she became a legislator. It is disturbing her that journalism is not fully developed as a profession that the […]

Against this background, another journalist who is also a policy maker felt she should contribute to development of her profession. For fifteen years, Mrs Abike Dabiri-Erewa reported news and aired views on Nigeria Television Authority before she became a legislator. It is disturbing her that journalism is not fully developed as a profession that the practitioners will be proud of. It is also a cause for concern that journalists are poorly paid and some media employers do not put a premium on the welfare of those who make their medium what it is through their dedication to news reporting. Mrs Dabiri-Edewor felt strongly that she must not pass through the House of Representatives without addressing without doing something about these challenges facing the media.  She therefore presented a bill for an Act to provide for the repeal of the Nigerian Press Council Act of 1992 and establish in its place the Nigerian Press and Practice of Journalism Council. When the Bill was read on the floor of the National Assembly, it generated so much controversy and received bashing from various quarters ThisDay newspaper carried a news story titled Concern, Anger Over New Anti-Media Bill. It linked the Bill with the military era and stated that ‘Ten years after the Nigerian mass media survived brutal military dictatorships; a bill is now before the House of Representatives seeking to curtail press freedom and teleguide the practice of journalism in the country.

Thisday, Monday November 16, 2009 (page 1)

The Bill also drew criticism from the Nigerian Guild of Editors, who described the Bill as totally unnecessary for the profession and the Nigerian public. The President of the Guild, Mr. Benga Adefaye, however concedes that employers have a duty to treat their staff fairly in accordance with their contracts of employment. Human rights activists and press freedom monitors condemned the Bill, dismissed as white washing censorship and alerted the relevant organ of the African Union which promptly called for the stepping down of the bill.

What Media Stakeholders Say About the Bill

I have been monitoring development on the bill and collating the views of journalists. Malam Kabiru Danladi was among the first to send his views. He reminded us that journalists have made immense contributions to the country’s development and they are a source of pride to nation.  They contributed to the independence struggle and resisted military dictatorships. They are also fighting and exposing corruption, indiscipline and helping to shape national debates.

Hon Abike Dabiri is Courageous

Kabiru Danladi says ‘they however suffer from a long history of exploitation from newspaper proprietors and dictatorial editors who forced some of them to make ends meet by involving in all sort things that dragged the profession into the cesspool. ‘Journalists’ role in society cannot be overemphasised. Without journalists, a society may likely regress or even decay. On the other hand, wrongly handled, journalist can also be a tool through which a nation and society can be destroyed. For long journalists in Nigeria hold the mirror through which the Nigerian society is reflected, however, they failed on their part to address the rot that seems to set into their profession. Nobody can deny that there are so many things that are indeed very wrong in the way journalism is practiced in this country. Therefore, instead of condemning Hon. Abike Dabri and blackmailing her, the Nigerian Guild of Editors and self-acclaimed protectors of freedom of speech should have helped her in drawing her attention to what they see in the Bill, that may likely drag us back to the dark days of military era. All those in fore-front of condemning the Bill and blackmailing Hon. Dabri are actively involved in the bastardisation of the profession on one hand and exploitation of their employees on the other. They have contributed in no small measure in the last 30-40 years to the present state of the profession.

What is wrong with the suggestion for instance of appointing a well qualified and experienced individual to serve as an editor in a media organisation? Or telling a journalist to be fair accurate, unbiased, and factual? Think of it. What is wrong with what the Bill advocated that the condition of service of journalist shall include salaries, allowances, leave, general and retirement benefits etc, which shall be negotiated collectively and as necessary between the NUJ, NPAN and BON. There are so many good things in the Bill as there are bad ones and it is very wrong for anybody, just because the law was silent about his form of exploitation for nearly 5 decades to think that any law that tries to address this is obnoxious.

I think journalists should praise Hon. Dabiri for even daring to sponsor a Bill to address a problem that even the NUJ and NGE are afraid to address for years now. Hon. Dabri should be courageous enough to withstand the pressures, abuse, intimidation and blackmail that will come from some sections, which claimed to be protecting the interest of journalists, but for long, exploited and ridiculed a profession that is regarded as the fourth estate of the realm. These are the people that have access to power at all levels. As Abidde once described them ‘they are filthy rich in filthy and unaccountable sort of way with choice lands and landed properties. For this group, it is all about money and power — not journalism, and certainly not the people’s interest’. Today Hon. Dabiri-Erewa is wrong because she is courageous enough to say ‘enough is enough’ and she did that knowing that there are people who will oppose it. This is a matter that the Ombudsman should make a priority and even ensure the Bill passed first and second reading because  it will assist in solving our problem.

As long as there are no laws guiding the practice, then journalists will continue to suffer from poor condition of service, exploitation from greedy newspaper owners and dictatorial editors. Journalists should first read the Bill, study it and criticise it and try to make their input as to the way they feel the law can serve them better. They should not just join the band wagon and condemn a Bill, which if passed has the potentials to improve their condition of service. They talked about freedom, which freedom? Freedom that turned them into beggars and praise singers of sort during events and occasions? Journalists should have a rethink; they should not be used to condemn a law that is out to protect them.

Kabiru Danladi Lawanti, Area 11, Garki, Abuja. 08035150369, 08054546764

 

Dear Kabiru Danladi

Your suggestion that the Ombudsman should ensure that the Bill scales through the first and second reading in the House of Representatives is a good one but achieving that would require the efforts of all stakeholders and goes beyond what the Ombudswoman can do. As a first step, we need to generate a debate on this issue and collate views before moving forward. This process has started with the publication of your views. I have also sought the views of a policy maker in the Federal Ministry of Information, the Director of Public Information Mr. Henry Angulu, Evelyn Onyilo, the Editor-in Chief of Phenomenal magazine and a former NTA staff,  and a free lance journalist. Their views will be shared with readers in the next edition. I request other stakeholders to please send their views to Ombudswoman by SMS or e mail.