Members of International Press Centre (IPC) and Media Rights Agenda (MRA) have expressed concern over the recent N5 million fine on Channels TV by the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), describing it as arbitrariness taken too far.
On March 31, it was announced that NBC had slammed a fine of N5 million on Channels TV, based on the claim that it violated the Nigeria Broadcasting Code because of the interview Seun Okinbaloye had with Labour Party (LP) vice presidential candidate, Yusuf Datti Baba-Ahmed, on March 22, 2023.
In the said interview, Baba-Ahmed expressed strong opposition to the swearing-in of the president-elect, Bola Tinubu, on May 29, 2023, asserting that it would be tantamount to the end of democracy.
But in a statement released to The Guardian, yesterday, the Executive Director of IPC, Lanre Arogundade, and his MRA counterpart, Edetaen Ojo, argued that although NBC did not disclose the material fact in its announcement of the sanction, it “apparently acted on a widely publicised petition.”
Specifically, they also observed that Director of Media and Publicity of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council (PCC), Bayo Onanuga, had demanded that the station be punished over the interview in question. The said petition was published by many news media on March 30, 2023.
According to them, barely 24 hours later, the NBC struck. “Against the well-established principle of natural justice, which, among others, makes fair hearing sacrosanct, NBC did not avail Channels TV the opportunity of putting forward its defence against Onanuga’s allegations before slamming the hefty fine.”
The group noted that assuming without conceding that Channels TV erred in the management of the said interview, it was still pertinent for the NBC to have heard its side of the story.
“In failing to do so, the NBC acted unfairly and unjustly, as it based its heavy-handed decision on the claims of one side only. NBC has, in this instance, again, exercised quasi-judicial powers injudiciously, by constituting itself to the prosecutor and the judge over a case brought before it by a third party. In previous instances, it has also additionally been the accuser,” they stated.
To them, Onanuga is not just anybody, but someone who speaks for the in-coming president. Ordinarily, they added, this should have informed the need for the NBC to act more cautiously, instead of exposing itself to the accusation that it has become the ruling party’s willing tool to suppress press freedom.
Even if, as the NBC claims, it acted based on its own observation, they argued that it was still imperative for the regulatory body allow Channels TV respond to the allegations, especially since that made it the accuser, the prosecutor and the judge.
The group urged the NBC to desist from walking such path, which undermines its credibility and independence as well as weakens the broadcast sector as a result. “We call on the commission to immediately reverse the hastily imposed fine and give Channels TV the deserved opportunity to defend itself.”
