How the Nigerian Constitution Protects Journalistic Freedom: A Comprehensive Analysis

Journalism, often heralded as the “Fourth Estate of the Realm,” plays an indispensable role in any functioning democracy. It serves as a crucial watchdog, holding power accountable, informing the citizenry, and fostering a vibrant public discourse. In Nigeria, the protection of this vital institution is primarily enshrined within the nation’s supreme law: the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). While the Constitution lays a strong foundation for journalistic freedom, its practical application is often a complex interplay of legal provisions, judicial interpretations, and the prevailing socio-political climate.

This extensive exploration will delve into the constitutional safeguards, examine relevant legal frameworks, highlight landmark judicial pronouncements, acknowledge the inherent limitations and challenges, and discuss the future trajectory of journalistic freedom in Nigeria.

The Constitutional Cornerstone: Section 39 and Section 22

The primary constitutional provision safeguarding journalistic freedom in Nigeria is Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees the fundamental right to freedom of expression. Specifically, Section 39(1) states:

“Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.”

While this section applies to every citizen, its implications for journalists are profound. It forms the bedrock upon which media practitioners can operate, enabling them to gather, process, and disseminate information without undue hindrance. The right to “receive and impart ideas and information” is particularly crucial for journalism, as it encompasses the entire journalistic process from newsgathering to publication.

Furthermore, Section 39(2) reinforces this right by stating:

“Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) of this section, every person shall be entitled to own, establish and operate any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas and opinions: Provided that no person, other than the Government of the Federation or of a State or any other person or bo¹dy authorized by the President on fulfilment of any condition laid down by an Act of the National Assembly, shall own, establish or operate a television or wireless broadcasting station for any purpose whatsoever.”

This subsection is significant as it grants individuals the right to establish media outlets, fostering a diverse media landscape. However, the proviso regarding television and wireless broadcasting stations introduces a notable exception, reserving the primary right to operate such mediums for the government, or those authorized by the President, subject to specific conditions. This distinction between print and broadcast media has historically been a point of contention and a source of potential limitation on journalistic freedom in the broadcast sector.

Beyond Section 39, the Nigerian Constitution also implicitly recognizes the role of the press in Section 22, which falls under Chapter II – Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy. While not directly a justiciable right, Section 22 places an obligation on the mass media:

“The press, radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the responsibility and accountability of the Government to the people.”

This section underscores the constitutional recognition of the media as a vital institution tasked with holding the government accountable. It positions the press as a critical pillar of democratic governance, emphasizing its watchdog function. While Chapter II provisions are generally not enforceable in court, Section 22 provides a strong moral and ethical mandate for the media, reinforcing the spirit of press freedom within the Nigerian democratic framework.

Interplay with Other Fundamental Rights

Journalistic freedom is not an isolated right; it is intrinsically linked to and reinforced by other fundamental rights enshrined in Chapter IV of the Nigerian Constitution. These include:

Right to Personal Liberty (Section 35): This protects journalists from arbitrary arrest and detention, which are often used to intimidate or silence them.
Right to Fair Hearing (Section 36): Should a journalist be accused of an offense, this section guarantees them a fair and public hearing, ensuring due process.
Right to Private and Family Life (Section 37): While journalists often delve into matters of public interest, this right ensures that their private lives are protected from unwarranted intrusion. Conversely, it also places a responsibility on journalists to respect the privacy of individuals they report on, unless there’s an overriding public interest.
Right to Peaceful Assembly and Association (Section 40): This right supports journalists’ ability to gather information at public events, protests, and in engaging with sources through associations.
Right to Freedom of Movement (Section 41): This enables journalists to move freely within Nigeria to gather news and information, without undue restrictions.

These interconnected rights provide a broader protective umbrella for journalists, recognizing that their work involves the exercise of multiple fundamental freedoms.

Legal Frameworks Supporting Journalistic Freedom

While the Constitution provides the overarching framework, several other laws and legal instruments contribute to the protection of journalistic freedom in Nigeria:

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2011: This landmark legislation is a crucial complement to Section 39 of the Constitution. The FOIA grants every person the right to access information held by public institutions. For journalists, this Act is invaluable as it provides a legal avenue to demand and obtain information from government bodies, thereby enhancing transparency and accountability. It shifts the burden from the applicant to the public institution to justify why information should not be disclosed, rather than the other way around. This empowers journalists to undertake investigative reporting with greater legal backing.
Broadcasting Act (National Broadcasting Commission Act): While Section 39(2) gives the government considerable control over broadcast media licensing, the NBC Act regulates broadcasting operations. Ideally, this regulation should be aimed at promoting diverse content and responsible broadcasting, rather than stifling dissenting voices. However, the application of this Act has sometimes been controversial, with the NBC accused of imposing arbitrary fines and sanctions on broadcast stations, particularly those perceived as critical of the government.
Press Council Act: This Act establishes the Nigerian Press Council, an independent body meant to promote ethical conduct and resolve disputes within the media industry. While it aims to foster professionalism, some critics argue its powers can be used to infringe on press freedom if not carefully applied.
Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act 2015: This Act addresses various cybercrimes, including cyberstalking, cyberbullying, and the dissemination of harmful content. While the intention is to curb misuse of digital platforms, concerns have been raised about its potential for abuse to target journalists and stifle online expression, particularly with broad definitions that could be interpreted to criminalize legitimate journalistic activities.
Official Secrets Act: This Act generally prohibits the disclosure of classified government information. While necessary for national security, it can be a tool to prevent journalists from exposing corruption or mismanagement within government, raising a perpetual tension between national security and public interest reporting.
Defamation Laws (Libel and Slander): These laws protect individuals and entities from false and damaging statements. Journalists must operate within these legal boundaries, ensuring their reports are factual and well-researched to avoid legal repercussions. However, the threat of vexatious defamation suits can be used to intimidate journalists and stifle critical reporting.

Landmark Judicial Pronouncements: Upholding and Interpreting Press Freedom

The Nigerian judiciary has played a pivotal role in interpreting and upholding the constitutional guarantees of journalistic freedom. Several landmark cases have shaped the landscape of press freedom in the country:

Tony Momoh v. Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1981): This is perhaps one of the most significant early cases on press freedom in Nigeria. Tony Momoh, then Editor of Daily Times, was summoned by the Senate to disclose the source of a published article. The court, in its ruling, affirmed the journalist’s right to protect their sources, recognizing the importance of source confidentiality for effective investigative journalism. However, the Court of Appeal, in a subsequent ruling on a similar matter (Attorney General v. Foster), held that the press cannot claim absolute immunity from disclosing sources, especially in grave circumstances or criminal investigations. This highlights the nuanced balance between press freedom and other societal interests.
Government of Lagos State v. Ajayi (1990): This case further solidified the principle that while the freedom of expression is guaranteed, it is not absolute and can be limited in certain circumstances, such as to protect national security, public order, or public health, as stipulated in Section 45 of the Constitution.
Newbreed Organisation Ltd. v. The Attorney General of the Federation (1994): This case challenged the government’s attempt to require newspapers to register annually. The Supreme Court ruled that such a requirement amounted to an undue restriction on press freedom, affirming the right of publications to operate without oppressive licensing regimes.
Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal v. Okonkwo (2001): Although not directly a press freedom case, the Supreme Court’s emphasis on the public’s right to know and the importance of public interest in certain disclosures has implications for journalistic reporting, especially concerning accountability of public institutions and professionals.
Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2022): This recent ECOWAS Court of Justice judgment, while not a Nigerian domestic court ruling, is highly significant. The ECOWAS Court ruled that the Nigerian government’s indefinite suspension of Twitter operations in 2021 violated the rights to freedom of expression, access to information, and media. The court found that access to social media platforms is a “derivative right” that is “complementary to the enjoyment of the right to freedom of expression.”

This ruling underscored the expanding scope of press freedom in the digital age and the illegality of arbitrary restrictions on online media. While not domestically binding in the same way as a Supreme Court ruling, it carries significant persuasive authority and international pressure.

Desmond Utomwen v. Nigeria Police Force (2012): A High Court awarded significant damages to journalist Desmond Utomwen who was brutalized by police while covering a protest. This judgment sent a strong message about the illegality of physical assaults on journalists and the need to protect their ability to carry out their duties without fear of violence.

These cases, among others, demonstrate the judiciary’s role in delineating the boundaries of press freedom and striking a balance between the rights of the media and other competing societal interests.

Limitations and Derogations: The Caveats to Freedom

While the Nigerian Constitution robustly guarantees journalistic freedom, it also provides for limitations and derogations. These are primarily found in Section 45 of the 1999 Constitution, which states:

“Nothing in sections 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41 of this Constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society –

(a) in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; or

(b) for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.”

This section is critical because it outlines the permissible grounds for restricting fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and the press. The key phrase here is “reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.” This implies that any law seeking to limit press freedom must be:

Legal: The restriction must be based on a clear and existing law, not arbitrary government action.
Legitimate: The law must serve one of the legitimate purposes outlined in Section 45 (e.g., national security, public order, public health).
Necessary and Proportionate: The restriction must be the least restrictive means to achieve the legitimate aim and must be proportionate to the threat it seeks to address. This “three-part test” (legality, legitimacy, necessity, and proportionality) is a widely accepted international standard for assessing restrictions on human rights.

Applying this test in practice can be challenging. For instance, while national security is a legitimate concern, it has often been invoked broadly by governments to stifle critical reporting, making it difficult for journalists to discern what truly poses a threat to national security versus what is merely inconvenient for those in power.

Other specific limitations and potential areas of concern include:

Defamation and Libel: Journalists can be held liable for publishing false and damaging information about individuals or organizations.
Sedition: Although largely considered an archaic law in many democracies, sedition laws, which criminalize speech that incites rebellion against the government, still exist in Nigeria and have occasionally been used against journalists. However, judicial interpretations have increasingly narrowed the scope of sedition, requiring proof of actual incitement to violence.
Contempt of Court: Journalists can be cited for contempt if their reporting interferes with the administration of justice or disrespects judicial authority.
Privacy: While journalists have a duty to inform the public, they must also respect individuals’ right to privacy, especially where there is no overriding public interest.
Official Secrets: Reporting on classified government information can lead to prosecution under the Official Secrets Act.
Hate Speech: Laws against hate speech aim to prevent incitement to violence or discrimination, but their broad application can sometimes be used to target legitimate expression.
Broadcast Licensing: The requirement for government authorization to operate broadcast media, as per Section 39(2), means that the government holds significant power over the broadcast landscape, which can be a tool for control if not exercised transparently and fairly.

Challenges to Journalistic Freedom in Practice

Despite the constitutional protections, journalistic freedom in Nigeria faces numerous practical challenges:

Political Interference and Pressure: Governments, both at federal and state levels, often exert overt and covert pressure on media organizations and journalists to shape narratives or suppress critical reporting. This can manifest through withdrawal of advertising, denial of access to information, or direct threats.
Economic Vulnerability: Many media houses in Nigeria are financially precarious, making them susceptible to economic inducements or pressures from powerful individuals or political actors. This can lead to self-censorship or a reluctance to pursue stories that might jeopardize revenue streams.
Physical Attacks and Harassment: Journalists in Nigeria are unfortunately still subjected to physical assaults, arrests, detention, and harassment by security forces or political thugs while carrying out their duties. These acts create a climate of fear and self-censorship.
Impunity for Attacks on Journalists: A persistent challenge is the lack of accountability for those who attack or threaten journalists. When perpetrators are not brought to justice, it emboldens others and further chills press freedom.
Cybercrime Act and Digital Crackdowns: The broad provisions of the Cybercrime Act have been criticized for their potential to be used against journalists for online publications. There have also been instances of government-ordered internet shutdowns or social media bans, which significantly hinder the dissemination of information.
Lack of Access to Information: Despite the FOIA, journalists still face difficulties in accessing information from government agencies, with many public officials either unaware of the Act or unwilling to comply with its provisions.
Media Ownership and Pluralism: While Section 39(2) allows for private ownership of media, the concentration of ownership in the hands of political elites or business moguls can limit editorial independence and diversity of views.
Professional Ethics and Self-Regulation: While not a constitutional challenge, issues of ethical conduct, sensationalism, and the spread of misinformation (including “fake news”) by some media practitioners can erode public trust and provide justification for restrictive measures. A strong commitment to professional ethics and robust self-regulation mechanisms are crucial for the media to defend its freedom effectively.
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs): Powerful individuals or corporations may file baseless or exaggerated defamation lawsuits against journalists to drain their resources and deter critical reporting, even if the suits are unlikely to succeed.

International Human Rights Instruments and Nigeria’s Commitments

Nigeria is a signatory to several international and regional human rights instruments that reinforce the principles of freedom of expression and press freedom. These include:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) 1948: Article 19 of the UDHR states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media regardless of frontiers.”
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) 1966: Article 19 of the ICCPR reiterates the right to freedom of expression, with similar provisions to the UDHR.
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) 1981: Article 9 of the ACHPR guarantees the right to receive information and to express and disseminate opinions within the law. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has further adopted the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information in Africa, which provides more detailed guidelines for states to uphold these rights.

While these instruments are not directly enforceable in Nigerian courts without domestication, they serve as guiding principles and benchmarks for evaluating the country’s human rights record. They also provide a basis for international advocacy and pressure when press freedom is curtailed.

The Role of Civil Society and Media Advocacy Groups

Beyond the legal and judicial frameworks, civil society organizations (CSOs) and media advocacy groups play a critical role in safeguarding journalistic freedom in Nigeria. Organizations like the Media Rights Agenda (MRA), Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), International Press Centre (IPC), and the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ) actively:

Monitor and Document: They document violations of press freedom, including attacks on journalists, arbitrary arrests, and censorship.
Advocate for Policy Reforms: They lobby for the repeal of restrictive laws and the enactment of new legislation that promotes press freedom and access to information.
Provide Legal Aid: They offer legal assistance to journalists facing prosecution or harassment.
Raise Public Awareness: They educate the public about the importance of press freedom and its role in a democratic society.
Engage in Strategic Litigation: They take legal action to challenge unconstitutional laws or actions that violate journalistic freedom, as seen in the SERAP v. Federal Republic of Nigeria case.

Their consistent efforts are vital in pushing back against attempts to curtail press freedom and in holding both state and non-state actors accountable.

Prospects and Future Trajectory

The future of journalistic freedom in Nigeria remains a dynamic and evolving landscape. While the constitutional provisions provide a strong foundation, the practical realization of these rights depends on several factors:

Strengthening Democratic Institutions: A robust and independent judiciary, a responsive legislature, and a government committed to democratic principles are essential for safeguarding press freedom.
Effective Implementation of the FOIA: Consistent and proactive implementation of the Freedom of Information Act across all levels of government is crucial to enhance transparency and enable journalists to access vital information.
Judicial Activism: A judiciary that continues to boldly interpret constitutional provisions in favor of fundamental rights, particularly freedom of expression, is paramount.
Media Professionalism and Ethics: The Nigerian media itself must uphold the highest standards of professionalism, accuracy, and ethical conduct to maintain public trust and legitimacy, thereby making it harder for critics to justify restrictions.
Digital Rights and Governance: With the increasing reliance on digital platforms, it is imperative to develop clear and rights-respecting legal frameworks for online expression, ensuring that efforts to combat misinformation or cybercrime do not inadvertently stifle legitimate journalism.
Protection of Journalists: Concrete measures, including swift and effective investigations into attacks on journalists and prosecution of perpetrators, are necessary to ensure the safety and security of media workers.
Economic Viability of Media: Exploring sustainable business models for media organizations can help reduce their vulnerability to external pressures and foster greater editorial independence.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Nigerian Constitution, particularly Section 39 and Section 22, provides a robust legal framework for the protection of journalistic freedom. This foundation is further strengthened by other fundamental rights and the Freedom of Information Act. However, the journey towards absolute press freedom is ongoing. While the judiciary has, at various junctures, demonstrated a commitment to upholding these rights, significant challenges persist from political interference, economic vulnerabilities, and evolving digital landscapes.A concerted effort from all stakeholders – government, civil society, the judiciary, and the media itself – is required to fully realize the constitutional promise of a free, vibrant, and independent press in Nigeria, a press that can truly uphold its responsibility of holding power accountable to the people.

Table of Contents