NIGERIA MEDIA MONITOR

(------


#03-01 Monday 5 January 1998

*	FOUR JOURNALISTS ARRESTED
*	GOVERNMENT STILL SCREENING DETAINEES FOR ANMESTY
*	COUP D'ETAT JOURNALISM AT RISK
*	A VIEW OF BROADCASTING DECREE
*	MUTED VOICES, SUFFERING FAMILIES

NEWSREEL

FOUR JOURNALISTS ARRESTED

Four journalists with the Diet newspaper were arrested by security
operatives on 28 December 1997. 

Arrested were Niran Malaolu (editor), Wale Adele (night editor), Emma Avwara
(production sub-editor) and Emeka Egerue (head of Computer department). 

Four armed soldiers, three in uniform, one in mufti, first called at the
premises of The Diet in the afternoon asking for the editor, but left when
told he was not in the premises. 

They returned at about 10.20 pm, scaled the fence of the building and, once
in, threatened to deal with anybody who did not cooperate with them in
taking away the editors.  They claimed they had the consent of the
newspaper's publisher to enter the premises. 

They later took away the four journalists in their car to an unknown
destination. 


Adele, Egerue and Avwara were released 29 December.  But Malaolu is still
being detained.  The acting Director of Defence Information, Col. Godwin
Ugbo, said his detention is on "orders from above" but gave no reasons for
the government action. 

GOVERNMENT STILL SCREENING DETAINEES FOR AMNESTY

The Federal government is still screening the names of all political
detainees in the country to determine those who are to be set free, and has
not abandoned her plan to give freedom to some of them. 

Police Public Relations Officer, Force Headquarters, Deputy Commissioner of
Police, (DCP) Young Arebamen disclosed this when asked to explain why none
of the detainees has not been released about two months after the promise
was made by the government. 

The Head of State, General Sani Abacha, had announced in his November 17,
1997 broadcast to mark the fourth anniversary of his administration, that
some of the political detainees would be released.

DCP Arebamen, exchanging views with the members of the Crime Correspondents
Association of Nigeria (CCAN) in his office, said that the committee set up
by the government was yet to complete its assignment.  The issue, he
stressed was not entirely a police affair. 

FEATURES

COUP D'ETAT JOURNALISM AT RISK

by Adido Uyo

Soldiers and other personnel of the military understand too well the
adventure called coup d'etat that anybody who is trying to define, much less
explain, the phenomenon to them could be rightly charged and convicted for
effrontery and trespass.  But it is a totally different matter when it comes
to what experts in crisis management and communication would call coup
d'etat journalism.  The point is very simple to see: Just as those who fell
timber cannot tell carpenters what to do with the wood, so can those who
execute coups not tell journalists what to do with coups. 

To be sure, "wood" and "coup" are a world apart, just as carpentry and
journalism are poles apart on the professional continuum.  Wood is a
physical matter, whereas coup is social; and carpentry is a
technical/mechanical occupation, whereas journalism is social/organize. 
However, the crux of the assertion that those who execute coups cannot tell
those who communicate coups lies in the concept of "prerogative." 
Prerogative means "a peculiar privilege shared by no other; a right arising
out of one's rank, position, or nature." To dramatize the essence of
prerogative, let me tell you something you may not already know.  It is the
prerogative of mothers to breast-feed babies.  Fathers may baby-sit, and
thereby feed babies from milk bottles.  But they cannot breast-feed babies.
That is not to say that a father cannot holler when a baby is crying because
the mother has inserted her nipple into the baby's nostril. 

As a matter of fact, the human body operates on the principle of functional
prerogative, by and large, given the functional dominance of the brain.  So,
our eyes cannot smell for us, just as our nose cannot see for us.  What is
true of the human body is supposedly so for society.  Farmers do not teach
our children for us, while teachers do not produce food.  Politicians do not
fight wars, while soldiers......ah you re! I'd wanted to say, while soldiers
do not administer the country.  But we all know otherwise.  And this is
exactly what is meant by aberration.  Military rule is a violation of the
principle of functional prerogative.  But it is more than that.  Having
taken over the function of another organ of society, the military actually
exercises dominance over all the other organs, that is, institutions of
society. 

It is the exercise of this functional dominance that was being exhibited
last week when the news of the alleged coup plot broke, and two members of
the military sought to dictate to or coax journalists, civil servants and
other groups of Nigerians concerning what they should say or not say, do or
not do.  The two are the military administrator of Ondo State and the
Director of Defence Information.  Because our focus is journalism, we shall
restrict this comment to the warning which the Director of Defence
Information gave to the press on how journalists should handle the story of
the alleged coup plot. 

By derivation, a coup d'etat is a blow to the state, and a blow to the state
is a blow to all who inhabit a given polity.  For that simple reason, coups
are not just military affairs.  They concern the public, every citizen, and
they concern journalists, particularly, because they are the citizens whose
function it is to inform the society about matters related to the event, to
interpret matters related to the event, and to comment on matters related to
the event.  These are respectively referred to as the news, interpretation
and opinions function of journalism, or the press.  Whereas the news
functions relies on facts, the opinion function relies on views, on
thoughts, on ideas.  And the midway function of interpretation relies on
analyses and inferences, on conclusions drawn from observations.  Indeed, an
additional fourth function is that of entertainment, as represented by
cartoons, whose logic oftentimes persuades people more than makes them
laugh. 

Coup communication involves all these functions, and coup communication is
what coup d'etat journalism is all about.  Unless journalists want to
abandon their responsibility to the society, they must be seen to be
discharging their functional prerogative.  This is why the advice of Colonel
Godwin Ugbo, Director of Defence Information, is less than altruistic. In
warning journalists to report only what they know to be a fact, so as not to
share the fate of their colleagues who were convicted during the 1995 coup
trial for their journalistic performance, Colonel Ugbo raised many ticklish
issues.  But that's by the way. 

Nigerian journalists, in keeping with their functional prerogative, have
engaged in coup communication since the first coup d'etat of 1966.  That is
to say, coup d'etat journalism is not new to the Nigerian Press. What is new
to the Nigerian Press is being persecuted for doing the work which the
nature of journalism obliges it to do, by another institution which is not
only violating the principle of functional prerogative in their society, but
also employing its functional dominance to teach other institutions how to
do their work, and beyond that, convicting them for something which does not
concern them at all:  Plotting and executing coups. 

There is no question about the non-violability of truth.  Journalists must
report only what they have verified to be the fact as news.  But nobody
should dictate to journalists who are engaged in the interpretation or
opinion functions, how they should analyse or comment on the facts that have
been ascertained.  One ascertained fact is that the Government has said that
some military officers have planned a coup which has been uncovered. 
Members of the public, and especially, of the Press, must be allowed to
weigh this fact, to chew it, to judge it, to advert their minds to it,
generally. A civilized, democratic culture, which this government claims to
be committed to, demands nothing less.  Besides, that is the only way the
Government can make the public believe that there was a coup plot, for which
the plotters should get the necessary sanction. 

*Dr. Uyo teaches Mass Comunication at the University of Lagos, Nigeria. 
Source: Sunday Diet, December 28, 1997. 


AN EXPERT'S VIEW OF DECREE 38

by Bankole Sodipo

Since 1959 when Africa's first television broadcasting station commenced
operations in Ibadan, radio and television broadcasts stations had been
state-owned and state-regulated until September 24, 1992 when the National
Broadcasting Commission Act, 1992 was passed to permit and regulate private
ownership of radio and television broadcasting stations and apparatus. The
act touches on a number of issues ranging from the regulation of the
broadcast industry, the grant of licenses, copyright local film programmes
and the wireless telegraphy.  Without much elaboration, the Act affects the
operation of the Nigeria Television Authority.  Given the constraints of
space, I intend to highlight the most significant issues for discussion. 

In the main, the 1992 Act is being administered by the Nigerian Broadcasting
Commission (hereinafter called the Commission or NBC) which is empowered to
implement government policies as they concern broadcasting.  This includes
the regulation of the industry, the establishment of ethics, standards and
codes, the undertaking of RD to develop the industry, the encouragement and
promotion of the Nigerian culture, and giving advice to the government on
policies to be adopted on international signals.  The Commission is also
empowered to administer the Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1961. 

Who grants licences

Is the power to grant broadcast licences the exclusive preserve of the
Commission or that of the President?  There is no doubt that the NBC has
powers to determine and apply sanctions (including the revocation of
licences) for any act done in contravention of the Broadcasting Code, or
acts which do not accord with public interest.  Licences may also be revoked
by the NBC if the holder is in default of paying prescribed fees or where
the licence has not been exploited within a year of issue.  However, it is
not entirely clear who has the right to grant broadcast licences. 

Section 2(1)(c) provides that the Commission is to receive and process
applications for ownership of radio and television stations, (including
cable or satellite), and make recommendations through the Minister, about
applicants to the President for the grant of radio and television licences.
This suggests that the Commission cannot grant a broadcast licence.  On the
other hand, section 9(2)(3) (4), suggests that the NBC can grant licences. 
It must be noted that the 1992 Act did not state anywhere that the licence
can be granted by the President.  However, the Act in section 9 states
specifically that "That grant of a licence by the Commission under this
Decree shall be subject to availability of broadcast frequencies".  This
inconsistently calls for a review. It is arguable that if deregulation is
the essence of the new policy for the broadcasting industry, the NBC should
be able to grant licences and the President should have nothing to do with
decisions taken. 

Who can apply for a broadcast licence? Foreign equity participation. 

Under the 1992 Act, applicants for a broadcasting licence must be a company
incorporated in Nigeria in which the majority shares are held by Nigerians. 
Licences are valid for 5 years in the first instance but they are renewable
on application made within six months before expiration.  The applicants
must give an undertaking that the licence will not be used to promote
religious or ethnic disaffection in Nigeria.  The applicant must indicate
specifications of the equipment to be used, the target audience and efforts
at promoting local contents of the programmes during the subsistence of the
licence. However, licences will not be granted to religious organisations or
political parties.  It done with the prior notification and approval of the
NBC.  Consequently, broadcast licences are similar to some other licences
such as oil explorations licences which are not transferable.  It means that
a licensee who is unable to exploit the licence for one reason or another
cannot transfer the same with the NBC's approval.  What then is the position
if a foreign corporation takes over a local company that has a licence, will
this amount to transfer of the licence?  The question may be asked, "What if
Time Warner makes a bid and eventually purchases a local private station? 
Is the licence transferred to Time Warner? If so what will be the attitude
of the NBC? It is strongly suggested that transferability albeit with the
NBC's approval should be permitted.  Nonetheless, lawyers can always be
instructed to structure a deal in such a way that it would not amount to a
transfer of a licence under the Act. 

Local contents requirements Each licence must have a schedule of proposed
programmes for periods like quarterly periods and a local content of 40% and
a synopsis of the programme plans.  It must be stated that I did not find
any statutory instrument empowering the NBC to reduce the local contents
requirement to 20%.  It would appear that the local content requirement is
aimed at promoting investments which will develop the local film and
television industry. If a licensee must broadcast local programmes which
must be paid for, local productions should be boosted. 

While the requirement for local programme content is to be commended for
foresight, it may appear to be unfair as between those who beam their
signals from outside Nigeria and those who either transmit or retransmit in
Nigeria.  International signals like CNN, for instance, beamed directly from
Atlanta cannot easily be repacked to include signals to be repacked to meet
the local content requirement.  This may discourage some 40% local content. 
It is not clear to the author whether the NBC has made it compulsory for
such foreigners from granting licences for the exploitation of their
signals. 

Source: Vanguard, December 31, 1997. 

MUTED VOICES, SUFFERING FAMILIES

By Bankole Ebisemeji

The cautious reports that characterised press coverage of the recent alleged
coup plot best illustrate the performance of the media in 1997.  Apparently,
the arrest, conviction and subsequent sentencing of four journalists to 15
year jail terms for complicity in the alleged coup plot of 1995 has
beclouded the usual insightful reportage of coup attempts in the past. 
Confronted with a similar situation this month, attributive reports took
over from the normal investigative journalism that endeared the Nigerian
press to the reading public. 

The media scene in the year under review is anything but exciting.  This is
due to the operating environment which experienced some significant radical
changes in terms of government-media relationship. 

>From the traditional arrest, harassment and detention of perceived
"offending" journalists, security operatives turned their arms against the
immediate family of journalists.  The year 1997 saw a repeated performance
of such feat as exemplified in the plight of Mrs Ladi Olorunyomi, wife of
the former editor-in-chief of The News magazine, Mr. Dapo Olorunyomi, and
that of Arit Igiebor, wife of Tell magazine's Nosa Igiebor. 

Mrs. Olorunyomi went through the experience twice this year.  On Thursday,
March 20, she was picked up at her Mushin, Lagos residence by four security
operatives who held her incommunicado until middle of May. 

The former production editor of Free Press magazine, Ladi Olorunyomi, was
again arrested on Monday, November 3 by security agents.  She was, however,
released same day. 

On her part, Mrs Igiebor's Ikeja home was invaded by 12 armed security
operatives looking for her husband on Wednesday, September 10 around I a.m
The security men who came in three vehicles, two of which bore the
inscription of the Lagos State anti-crime outfit, "Operation Sweep",
according to Mrs Igiebor, forced their way into the house, wielding
automatic guns and wearing military and anti-riot police uniforms, forced
her at gun point to lead them in a thorough search of the house.  She had
her four year-old daughter with her.  Mrs Igiebor who was taken away after
the fruitless search for her husband (who at the time and like Dapo
Olorunyomi was in the United States of America) was, however, freed in the
early hours of the morning with a request that she produced her husband
within 24 hours. 

The experiences have seen the Olorunyomis moved from their Mushin former
abode while Mrs Igiebor is under pressure to move out of her Ikeja home. 
Ladi and Arit's plight, no doubt opened a new chapter in the harassment of
media personnel in the country. 

Their experience was particularly irksome to Nigerians who continually plead
for the release of the four jailed journalists, drawing government's
attention to the suffering of their wives and children. 

Also suffering in silence like the others are the wives of Mr. Soji
Omotunde, editor, African Concord, Mrs Bamidele Emiede Omotunde, and Mrs
Osifo-Whiskey, wife of Mr. Onome Osifo-Whiskey, managing editor, Tell
Magazine. Messrs Omotunde and Osifo-Whiskey were taken away in a bizarre
manner on Saturday October 25 and Sunday, November 9 respectively.  Omotunde
who is yet to recover fully from an auto-crash that got him hospitalised for
seven months was held along Adeniyi Jones Avenue, Ikeja, Lagos, when
security operatives blocked his car, forced him into a Peugeot 505 car and
drove him to an unknown destination.  While Onome Osifo-Whiskey was arrested
on his way to church at the Ajanaku/Opebi Road junction, Ikeja, Lagos, in
the presence of his family.  The Tell managing editor who was allowed to
take his children back home was bundled into a security vehicle and driven
away. 

Mr. Omotunde was outraged when she heard of her husband's abduction and
tearfully told reporters that security agents had been playing a cat and
mouse game with her husband for two months before then.  The biology teacher
in a Lagos secondary school feared her husband's bad leg may have suffered
further damage.  "I wonder why people should brutalise a weak limping man
who is yet to recover from a devastating accident."  She said her family now
suffers tremendous hardship from their breadwinner's absence. 

Mrs. Igiebor reacting to speculations that the jailed and detained
journalists may be released through the Head of State, General Sani Abacha's
promised amnesty in his November 17 speech expressed doubt about such
development.  She advised families of detainees to design fresh plans of
living without them pending their release. 

With the plight of these women as background, the media scene in the year
under review did not witness any significant change in terms of relationship
with government.  Other journalists like Jenkins Alumona, editor, The News,
Babafemi Ojudu, managing editor of The News and Tempo magazines, Mohammed
Adamu, Abuja bureau chief, African Concord and Akin Adesokan of The Post
Express are presently in detention.  The premises of The News and Tell
magazines were raided at different times while vendors found with their
publications in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory were arrested and
briefly detained.  Mr Nduka Obaigbena, publisher of ThisDay newspaper was
also guest of security operatives who arrested him at the NICON NOGA Hilton
Hotel, Abuja.  He was held for a week.  Source:  The Guardian, December 29,
1997. 


TO OUR DEAR READERS: Media Monitor is a dialogical project. We expect that its contents will elicit reactions from its readers. Consequently, you are all encouraged to share your feelings with one another on its pages. Letters not longer than 200 words marked for the attention of the Editor, Media Monitor, should be e-mailed to: ijc@linkserve.com.ng

MEDIA MONITOR IS PUBLISHED WEEKLY AND CIRCULATED WORLDWIDE BY INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM CENTRE (IJC), TEJUMOLA HOUSE, 1ST FLOOR, 24 OMOLE LAYOUT, NEW ISHERI ROAD, P.O.BOX 7808, LAGOS, NIGERIA. TEL/FAX 234-1-4924998; E-MAIL: ijc@linkserve.com.ng


Media Monitor