Journalists must be neutral in reporting court judgements

Quite a number of rulings have come from court rooms in recent days that have left many individuals saying a lot of things. While those who benefit from such rulings describe them as the best thing that could happen in a whole life time, those who see themselves as the victims think it is the […]

Quite a number of rulings have come from court rooms in recent days that have left many individuals saying a lot of things. While those who benefit from such rulings describe them as the best thing that could happen in a whole life time, those who see themselves as the victims think it is the worst thing that should not even happen.
President Muhammadu Buhari was himself famously quoted last week as saying that the nation’s judiciary was his greatest headache. “On the fight against corruption vis-à-vis the judiciary, Nigerians will be right to say that is my main headache for now,” Buahri said on an occasion where he also spoke of how he suffered in the hands of the judiciary, each time beginning from election tribunal right up to the Supreme Court in the three times: 2003, 2007, and 2011 that he made his unsuccessful bids to be president.
A recent Supreme Court ruling that bewildered many into making statements that many found to be injurious to the judiciary was the Supreme Court ruling that confirmed the election of Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State.
Wike whose election had been faulted by both the election tribunal and the Court of Appeal was expected to be similarly handed a red card by the Supreme Court: which may be why numerous individuals did not know how to keep quiet when the court behaved differently.
When the Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) called a press briefing last Wednesday and it became clear that the theme was the typically critical response to court rulings by Nigerians, one wondered what there was that anyone could do.
The organization’s national coordinator Emmanuel Onwubiko soon charged that there was something the media should not do that it has been doing. He started in that direction by saying, “We commend the chief justice of Nigeria for his forthrightness and courage in the face of political intimidation from some central government officials who are deploying media forces to railroad the Nigerian judiciary into doing their bidding.”
Seeking to drive his point home to the newsmen that attended the briefing, Owubiko, a journalist and publisher himself, said, “There is much we can do in what should be a patriotic fight to safeguard the independence and integrity of the judiciary. We must be objective in reporting political litigations.”
He indicated his passion for what he made of the sacredness of the judiciary, especially the apex Supreme Court and how such sacredness must be protected when he extended his appeal to Nigerians of all callings, asking officials of the Federal Government as well as members of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the general public to protect the independence and integrity of the judiciary by accepting the rulings of courts in good faith, instead of going to great lengths to question such rulings.
He urged the Supreme Court, which has followed up the Rivers governor’s case with those of Akwa Ibom and Abia states by similarly upholding the elections of the two governors, to keep above board and not allow ‘political bullying’ from any quarters to influence its work.
Onwubiko said the criticisms that had attended certain Supreme Court rulings were unnecessary, as the Supreme Court which is the highest court of the land must be trusted if the country’s democracy is to thrive.
He, however, asked the judiciary not to be a respecter of anybody or group but to comply always with the Nigerian constitution in its dealings.
He said judicial independence which is vital for the sustenance of democracy is a concept recognizing that the courts must not be subjected to influence from any anyone, member of government or institution, and that respect for such judicial independence requires that people who comment on rulings by the courts, especially rulings by the Supreme Court, should do so with restraint.