Abike Dabiri’s Sword of Damocles

Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa’s obnoxious media bill is causing tremendous concerns nationwide, particularly in her primary constituency, the media, and might turn out to the proverbial Sword of Damocles. Joseph Ekeng writes that stakeholders are smelling a rat, mostly with the house of representative’s avowed face-off with the media. The proposed Nigerian Press and Practice of Journalism Council bill, it is feared, could receive the attention of the house instead of the more popular Freedom Of Information (FOI), which is favoured by the Nigerian press.

His face wore a stern look as he spoke at the press briefing called to celebrate Dimeji Bankole’s second anniversary as speaker of the House of Representatives. His tone was antagonistic as the speaker accused the media of favouring the executive arm of government over the legislature. He blamed the media for writing embarrassing reports about the legislature, more than it did about the executive arm of government.

Bankole’s tirade was prompted by a journalist’s question about the relevance of the N52 billion reportedly lavished by the house’s members on foreign trips between 2007 and 2009, alone, purportedly on the welfare of Nigerians. His words: “Whipping the National Assembly all the time, I will tell you, will only weaken the National Assembly; and weakening the National Assembly will allow absolute power to the executive, and corruption will be absolute.”

Curiously, Bankole’s criticism is coming on the heels of house member Abike Dabiri-Erewa’s push for a media law that stakeholders aver could undermine free press. The proposed law seeks to, among other things, abolish the Nigerian Press Council (NPC), replacing it with a Nigerian Press and Practice of Journalism Council (the Council) whose Chairman is to be hired and fired by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the recommendations of the Minister of Information. It also spells out the powers of the Council and addresses ownership of the media; meddles with freedom of journalists to practice their profession; stipulates qualifications to practice of journalism and be appointed editor; and touches on conditions of service etc.

 

Controversy

Stakeholders mark out some of the controversial portions of the bill as Sections 26, 28, 33, 35, 36, 45, 50, 52, 59 and Part X. Section 26 states the minimum qualification for the practice of journalism in Nigeria, highlighting passing the Council’s approved qualifying examinations, membership of the Journalists’ Registration Board to be established by the Council, employment as an editorial staff, and possession of a University Degree or a Polytechnic Diploma, among others.

Section 28 gives the Council the power to approve course of study, qualifications, examinations, and institutions that intending journalists need to pass through or pass in order to practice in Nigeria and the power to withdraw approval of such courses, institutions, examination etc.

Section 33 specifies the minimum qualification for appointment as an editor; including; at least 25 years of age, registration as a journalist, and at least ten years experience.

Sections 35 and 36 aim to legislate the wages earnable by journalists. Section 35 states: “In order to ensure the independence, objectivity, impartiality and transparency of journalists, they shall be placed on salaries, allowances, pensions and general conditions of service at least not less than 20 per cent above those paid to staff in Federal and State Government parastatals and private companies as the case may be.”

Part IX containing Sections 52 to 64, sets out the disciplinary processes and procedures while Part X made up of Sections 65 to 68, sets out the offences and penalties.

 

Mischief ?

In all, it is easy to smell some mischief going through the bill. In trying to defend her action, Dabiri-Erewa likes to amplify the fact that the document will sanitise the profession of journalism by ridding it of quacks. She posits that it will also ensure that journalists are well paid. In her vocal defence of the bill at a public forum recently, she says: “We have fake journalists all over the place and they are denting the image of the profession. This bill will address this problem. I feel bad when I go to an event and see touts clustering around dignitaries, calling themselves journalists and collecting money from them, which I know that any real journalist will not do.” Of course these are issues every journalist is concerned about and want addressed. But the formulae the lawmaker has proposed to solve these problems look more like a bigger problem itself.

 

Killing an Ant with a Sledge Hammer

Some aspects of the bill obviously look like trying to kill an ant with a sledge hammer. One of such is the imposition of sanctions, jail-terms, fines and suspension for media outlets found guilty of sensational reporting on violent conflicts, parliamentary or inter-governmental disputes, natural disasters and other “negative trends and tendencies”. The bill recommends a prescription of up to 12-months rustication against defaulting journalists. In the case of libel, a journalist or media organisation is liable to a fine of between N50, 000 and N100,000 for a journalist or organisation, or suspension of the journalist or organisation from practice.

The executives of the Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria (NPAN) dismiss the proposed bill as a duplication of the existing libel law. “The laws of libel and sedition are enough checks and balances and they are effective. Let the journalist practice his profession subject only to existing laws of the land,” the body says. Stakeholders note that the bill is comparable with some sections of an obnoxious decree promulgated in the height of the military dictatorship.

“Dabiri-Erewa’s Bill seeks to rob the tiger of its “tigritude” (apologies Professor Wole Soyinka) by removing its fangs and clipping its claws. There is nothing in the draft bill that is not adequately provided for by existing laws of the land. If the idea is to professionalise journalism and tighten its ethical regime, it is not government control that will achieve it,” Ochereome Nnanna, a media columnist states.

 

Oath of Secrecy

Section 10 also draws loud criticism for requiring that members of the proposed Council swear to an oath of secrecy. Now, for Gbenga Adefaye, President of the Nigerian Guild of Editors, that was another attempt to drag the profession in the mud and undermine global ethical standards. “This may be a standard ritual in government offices, but journalism is about revelation and conflict. We therefore reject any ritual that goes against the grain of transparency and openness in public affairs, which such oath-taking obviously seeks to encourage and perpetuate,” he says, noting that journalism has no place for shrines, chief priests and the sort of practices that has encouraged public officials to hide sordid files of theft and fraud “by simply stamping such files confidential.”

 

Licensing of Journalists

The other very controversial aspect of the bill is the attempt to license journalists. Stakeholders observe that in an increasingly complex world, the profession has benefited immensely from the contributions of professionals from other fields. Of course, anyone who truly intends to make a career from journalism will always find specialised journalism training  and continuous self-development  very useful, Azubike Ishekwene, Director of Publications in Punch newspaper, states.

 

Stepping Beyond the Bounds

Ishekwene also insists that the lawmaker is stepping beyond bounds by trying to fix wages for privately run media outfits. In his view, this attempt may provoke labour issues and set employers against employees as the employers who cannot afford to pay will be forced to cut back staff, fold up, or employ journalists by other names, so as not to foul the law while struggling to remain in business. His words: “In a country where every business is its own virtual government, providing its own electricity, roads and water, you have to get a job first before negotiating salaries. Why was this difficult for Abike to see?” he is left wondering.

While calls for the bill to be withdrawn from the house persist, Dabiri-Erewa is holding on stoutly, stating that the bill is far from a perfect document and that it is still open for inputs from stakeholders. Some the media operators argue that instead of the proposed Council which will effectively make the media a government department, government should give strength to the Press Ombudsman. “Only a fool will argue that the press does not need urgent house-cleaning. Low ethical standards, shoddy reporting, and corruption remain serious problems. No serious profession can continue to sweep them under the carpet. That is precisely the reason why newspaper publishers, journalists and editors set up the Press Ombudsman in June, to deal with complaints of ethical nature involving journalists.

“The Ombudsman, a private-sector-led media watchdog, must be given a chance. If Abike and Company are really interested in a vibrant, prosperous press, the legislature should pass the Freedom of Information Bill (FOI), which will have a far more profound impact on the destiny of the press and the public as a whole,” Ishekwene states.

The Nigeria Guild of Editors (NGE), while reiterating the need for in-house cleansing in the media, rejects the bill, calling on the lawmakers to rather devote efforts to the passage of the FOI, “which will have a more profound impact on accountability and transparency,” according to the guild.