NIGERIA MEDIA MONITOR

{------


#03-32 Monday 17 August, 1998.


*	JOURNALISTS ASSAULTED
*	SACKED MEDIA WORKERS DEMAND ENTITLEMENTS 
*	FREED JOURNALISTS WIN AWARD
	GOVT. OWES MEDIA, JOURNALISTS N28M ($329,280) DAMAGES
*	FG SCRAPS DECREE TWO
*	'ISPs VIOLATE NITEL GUIDELINES'
*	NPO's POSITION ON THE NATIONAL MASS MEDIA COMMISSION

NEWSREEL
SECURITY MEN ASSAULT JOURNALISTS
Security men in Imo State Government House, Owerri led by Lieutenant Kefas
on Wednesday 5 August, 1998 physically assaulted two journalists in the
presence of the Imo State police commissioner, Mr. Mohammed Shehu when
pensioners stormed the state secretariat to protest non-payment of their
monthly stipends.

As early as 8.a.m, the pensioners, numbering about 2,000 besieged the
multipurpose hall, venue of the swearing-in of members of the state civil
service commission within the state secretariat, vowing to disrupt the
proceedings their demands were not met. Few minutes later, the state
police commissioner, Mr. Shehu Mohammed, came out to address the crowd.
Just as he was speaking, Lieutenant Kefas confronted the Vanguard
Correspondent, Sam Onwuemodo and asked him why he was taking notes. As he
identified himself, Kefas slapped him and ordered him to leave
immediately, other journalists, including pensioners protested, but the
soldiers were not done yet, as a colleague of Kefas again threw a punch at
a Concord reporter Chidi Nkwopara.

It took the intervention of the Chief Press Secretary to the in Imo State
Military Administrator, Mr. Bright Nwelue and the Information
commissioner, Mr. Sylvester Alakwe before the soldiers could stop the
indiscriminate beating and assaults given the two journalists. The Chief
Press Secretary   apologised profusely. He said "It is a pity I was not
present when the ugly incident happened. But I promise to take it up. I'm
very very sorry."

SACKED HERALD WORKERS DEMAND ENTITLEMENTS
No fewer than 151 retrenched workers of Kwara State owned Herald
Newspapers who have not been paid their entitlements since January last
year have taken their cases to the public, begging to be paid.

The workers were relieved of their jobs by the new management of Herald at
the instance of the former state Administrator, Col. P.A.M Ogar.

According to the workers, they were demanding for payments and claims
amounting to N836,556.73 ($9,842) made up of N427,496.72 ($5, 029) salary
arrears; N73,942 ($869,910) leave bonus for 1998 and 1996 and N47,656
($560) National Housing Fund Scheme deductions made from their salaries.

The workers who spoke with newsmen in Ilorin said they had been subjected
to all forms of handships ranging from the general precarious economic
situation to a personal financial constraints affecting their feeding,
housing and special domestic obligations including paying children school
fees.

"Some of us have withdrawn our children from school while those of us
whose relations took ill along the line in the hospital had either died or
were left there uncared for because of these problems," they lamented.

They submitted that they had made several representations including a
total number of 25 visits to both the information commissioner, Mr. Mathew
Afolayan, and Herald Editor-in-Chief to no avail.

They accused the Editor-in-Chief, Mr. Raheem Adedoyin, of paying to them
only their three months salary in lieu of notice nine months after their
retrenchment as against the approval of the administrator, Col. Ogar, that
they should be paid immediately.

FREED JOURNALISTS WIN AWARD
The United States-based human rights watchdog, The Human Rights Watch has
approved a cash award prize of about $170,000 (N14.4m) to 44 writers in 19
nations of the world.

The 44 Journalists which include all the recently released journalists in
Nigeria are to benefit from the cash gift to compensate and congratulate
them for their fight for the protection of media and human rights in their
countries.

Report on the Voice of America, VOA, said that major awards and prices
will go to three countries like Vietnam, Nigeria and Turkey where
journalists face the greater oppression and intimidation from the
government of the day.

An official of the Human Rights Watch said that the recipients have
reportedly been facing unlawful imprisonment and torture as they were
banned with their telephone lines and access to communications and
information cut off". 

The spokesperson for the group, Mrs. Masha Alena told VOA that writers in
Nigeria, Vietman and Turkey have been exposed to harassment, closure of
media houses, oppression and suppression for decades.

She said Nigeria, Vietnam and Turkey are the current human rights
violating states of the world as these countries lead in attacks on and
intimidation of journalists.

According to her, Nigeria, during the corrupt government of late General
Sani Abacha was the highest violator of media rights with over 27
journalists including the innocent ones either incarcerated in prisons,
forced into exile or even assassinated.

Though the report did not mention the names of the writers who will
receive the awards, Human Rights Watch said that six Nigerian journalists
will be recipients of the awards.

The group hailed journalists from the independent media houses in Nigeria
including The News and Tell magazines for their resilience in the face of
repression in days of the late General Abacha.

Human Rights Watch said that it hopes that the present government in
Nigeria though military, will stick to his promises and return power to
the an elected civilian government in May 1999.

GOVT. OWES MEDIA, JOURNALISTS N28M ($329,280) DAMAGES
Over N28 million ($329,280) is being owed media houses and journalists by
the Federal Government as judgment  debts over illegal closure and
detention, the chairman of the Centre for Free Speech (CFS), Mr. Richard
Akinnola, has said.

Punch Nigeria Ltd., publishers of The Punch, Saturday Punch and Sunday
Punch are yet to be paid N25 million while Concord Press Nigeria Ltd.,
publishers of National Concord, Weekend Concord and Sunday Concord, is
being owed N1.5 million ($17,640) by the Federal Government over their
closure in 1994.

Tell Communications Ltd., publishers of Tell magazine's claim of N1.5
million ($17,640) over seizure of its publication in 1994 is also pending
for payment while Mr. Soji Omotunde, Editor, African Concord and Mr. Bola
Bolawole, Chairman, The Punch editorial board have N100,000 ($1,176) each
as award over their unlawful detention by security operatives in 1994 and
1997.

The Punch Nigeria Ltd award of N25 million (294,000) was given by Justice
Tajudeen Odunowo of the Federal High Court on July 29 1994 as damages over
its proscription in June 1994 while Bolawole, then its editor was awarded
N100,000 ($1,176) as damages for unlawful detention.

Concord Limited's N1.5 million (17,640) was awarded by Justice Babatunde
Belgore, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court on August 18, 1994 over
its proscription.

Tell's N1.5 million is in respect of the seizure of 55,000 copies of the
magazine on December 17, 1995 by security operatives. The award was given
in a judgment delivered by Mr. Justice Vincent Egbedion of the Federal
High Court, Lagos, in February 1996.

Justice Dan Abutu of the Lagos Federal High Court on December 16, last
year, ordered the Directorate of Military Intelligence (CDM), the State
Security Service (SSS), the Inspector General of Police and the
Attorney-General of the Federation to pay N100,000 ($1,176) to Omotunde,
as exemplary damages over his unlawful abduction and detention by security
operatives on October 25, last year.

Speaking at the public presentation of a book, Nigerian Media and Legal
Constraints, on 5 August, 1998 Akinnola called on the government to pay
the debts and release Mr. Niran Malaolu, Editor of The Diet currently
serving a 15-year jail term over last year's alleged coup plot.

He also urged the DMI to grant journalists permission to see Mr. Moshood
Fayemiwo, publisher of The Razor at his detention centre.

He said: "We challenge the DMI authorities to invite the press to see him
at his detention centre. Otherwise, if he is still alive, why has he not
been released along with other detained journalists, some of whom had
earlier heard him howling in his dungeon?"

He also called for the repeal of section 58 of the criminal code,
describing it as nebulous and subject to abuse by the government.

He said the law, which governs sedition and the importation of seditious
and undesirable publication, "is a carry over of the colonial era
undeserving of esteem in a sovereign state. Almost four decades after
Nigeria gained political independence from Britain, the law still lists as
an offence any publication that may incite hatred against the Queen.  This
contravenes the Nigerian constitution, the African Charter on Human and
People's Rights and other international human rights instrument to which
Nigeria is signatory".

FG TO SCRAP DECREE 2
The State Security (Detention of Persons) Decree 2 of 1994, notorious for
ensuring the detention of a long list of prominent Nigerians may be on is
way to the archives.

It is believed to be one of the several "anti-democracy" laws listed for
abrogation by the Provisional Ruling Council (PRC) at its last meeting in
Abuja Thursday, 6 August, 1998.

The decree which was promulgated by the Buhari administration but put to
maximum  use by the Gen. Sani Abacha regime saw the arrest and detention
without trial of such Nigerians as Chief Bola Ige, Chief Gani Fawehinmi,
Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo, Late Maj.-Gen. Shehu Yar'Adua, Mr. Femi Falana,
Chief Frank Kokori, Chief Olabiyi Durojaiye, Mr. Femi Aborisade, Dr.
Frederich Fasehun, Mr. Olisa Agbakoba, Ex-Sultan Ibrahim Dasuki, and
Alhaji Abubakar Rimi.

Other victims of the decree include Alhaji Sule Lamido Mr.. Chima Ubani,
Mr. Onome Osifo-Whiskey, Mr. Segun Mayegun, Chief Anthony Enahoro, the
late chief M.K.O Abiola, Chief Arthur Nwankwo, Mr. Udenta and Mr.
Sylvester Odion-Akhaine. All of whom have since been released by the
present military government.

In all, as many as 3,000 persons may have been detained at one time or the
other under the decree.

The move, to abrogate the degree was sequel to a petition sent to the
Provisional Ruling Council by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC),
calling on the apex ruling body to revisit the continued existence of the
decree.

According to the commission, the contents of the decree amounted to a
gross violation of the fundamental human rights of the citizenry.

Maj-Gen. Godwin Abe, Commandant, Training and Doctrine (TRADOC), Minna had
at the close of the council's meeting in Abuja hinted that the PRC had
resolved to repeal some decree.

The PRC member did not specify the affected decrees. But Aso Rock sources
said the dreaded Decree No. 2 topped he list of "decrees to be outlawed by
the new administration."

Other decrees pencilled down for de-legislation include decrees banning
unionism in all universities as well as the anti-trade union decrees which
legalised the appointment of sole administrators to manage the affairs of
the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and its affiliate bodies.

The decision to repeal the decrees is believed to be in consonance with
the administration's commitment tothe protection of the fundamental human
rights of the citizenry.


ISPs VIOLATE OUR AGREEMENT, SAYS NITEL SPOKESMAN
The received only lines which Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are
contesting the new charges of N10,000 ($117.6) imposed on them by the
Nigerian Telecommunication Limited (NITEL) deserve the charges, according
to NITEL Deputy General Manager (Public Relations) Mr. Tayo Ekundayo.

The NITEL spokesman said that contrary to widely held views, especially in
the media, the received only lines which are called "dedicated lines" are
being used contrary to the agreement the ISPs entered with NITEL.

According to Ekundayo, "by simply dedicating those lines as receive only,
there is already a violation of our agreement because our exchanges are
primarily configured to make and receive calls and not permanently on
receive only. In practical terms, the lines have more or less become
leased circuits."

While considering the ISPs allegations against NITEL as unfortunate,
Ekundayo said "they are behaving as if they did not sign with us that our
lines allocated to them will be used for basic telephony by which calls
would be made and received on those lines."

Ekundayo explained that "the truth of the matter is that the ISP installs
his equipment which links through any of the new technologies to database
in other countries. He uses NITEL lines to solicit customers from whom he
collects sums of money monthly, which means NITEL lines are now being used
for purposes other than basic telephony for which the lines were obtained
in the first place."

He said that from the huge income made available through the use of NITEL
lines, which have been tied down and would have been generating money for
the company. "Although we appreciate the fact that they are private
investors, but can they tell the nation how much they are making from the
use of NITEL services as they have gleefully calculated how much NITEL
makes from receiving only services they enjoy.  Is it true that their
customers pay as much as N80,000 ($941) annually in addition to usage
charges?" Ekundayo asked.

In justifying the N10,000 ($117.6) charges imposed on the so-called
received only lines, Ekundayo explained that "these digital lines used by
the ISPs are acquired in place of high demand where lines could have gone
to more customers who are being indirectly denied of NITEL services. Aside
from this, these are digital lines on which NITEL makes millions of naira
every month," adding that the N10,000 ($117.6) charges by NITEL represents
the average generated revenue per line in Lagos service areas where the
lines are being used.

Ekundayo alleged that "it is fraudulent to argue that the lines obtained
from NITEL are in use all the time as engineers know that apart from the
fact telecommunications is based on probability, the  bulk of revenue
earned in the business is from long distance call which is not so in this
case. Local calls do not mean much in telecommunications revenue as quite
a lot of countries with high tele-density do not even charge local calls
because of logistics of billing."

Ekundayo equally said that "on these lines which are being used by the
ISPs they only pay monthly rentals of about N105.00 ($1.8) which are not
enough to maintain the lines at the point of subscription to NITEL," For
instance, he continued, "our exchanges must be powered, they depreciate
over time while the external lines taking signal to various destinations
must be maintained."

Ekundayo denied that NITEL is against the growth of Internet in the
country considering the fact that "we have just spent millions to build
this nation's Internet Gateway which will ensure high speed as experienced
in other parts of the world and also to correct the present anomalies
which the ISPs are taking advantage of. The telecommunications industry
has not collapsed today because of NITEL's insistence that proper
procedure must be followed before participants can be allowed access into
the network because what happened to the banking industry in instructive
here."

He said the ISPs have a choice of running their systems through wireless
systems if they consider that more economical because "we are not supposed
to run a system at a loss to the owners and in this case the Nigerian
nations."

Meanwhile, Mobitel Limited, a private telecommunication operator is likely
to flag off its service provision of voice telephony as an alternative to
Internet Service Providers. Mobitel is one of the few Privates
Telecommunications Operator (PTO's) that is able to provide the quality of
service and bandwidth required like NITEL. Besides, its access charges for
the ISPs usage may drop remarkably.

NPO'S POSITION ON THE NATIONAL MASS MEDIA COMMISSION
The Nigerian Press Organisation (NPO) published the following, in 1997, in
reaction tot he provision for a National Mass Media Commission in the 1995
Draft Constitution.

In the heat of the 1993 political crisis, the Abacha administration
convened the constitutional conference which was boycotted by some
promiment leaders of sections of the Nigerian society.

The attendant confusion and distrust polarised Nigerians against
themselves while sections of the press were seen by many as vehicles for
destabilising the conference and the nation.

The response of the constitutional conference, in the heat of the moment,
was the provision for the inauguration of wholesale constitutional
censorship through the National Mass Media Commission as a way of
"checking the excesses of the press." As we now enter the mood of national
reconciliation and march towards the next millennium under a free
democratic society, we believe it is time to take a second look at a
document drafted in the heat of the political crisis, and a constitutional
provision which can only return Nigeria to dictatorship.

It needs restating that it is impossible to conceive of a democratic
culture in which the Press, abinitio, is constrained by provisions of the
very Constitution that is supposed to usher in a free society.  A free
society is virtually synonymous with a free press.  Neither can be
sustained in the absence of the other. The same constitution that imposes
specific obligations on the press, ought not at the same time to hamstring
the press by constitutional provisions that render it impotent, and
incapable of discharging its obligations, as stipulated in the
Constitution. To do so is to enshrine in the Basic Law of the land a
fundamental contradiction that is clearly undersirable.

There is a raging controversy over the desirability or otherwise of
creating the National Mass Media Commission, an institution, that has been
listed under section 154 (Q) of the 1995 Draft Constitution.  Its
composition and functions are set out under section 46 of part one of the
Third schedule to the Constitution.

Composition of the Commission:
The Commission will have 11 members as follows:
A:	A distinguished mass media practitioner as Chairman
B:	A representative of the Newspaper Proprietors'Association of
Nigeria
C:	A representative of the Radio Proprietors' Association
D:	A representative of the Television Proprietors' Association
E:	A representative of the Guild of Editors.
F:	A representative of the Nigeria Union of Journalists
G:	A representative of the Ministry of Communications
H:	Two members to represent the general public
I:	Two other members to represent such interests not otherwise
represented as may be determine by the President.

Under Section 46(2)  the functions of the  Commission are listed as
follows:
(a)	To coordinate, promote and regulate the existence of newspapers,
magazines and publications generally as well as radio and television
stations in the country.
(b)	To liaise with, monitor and assist proprietors of radio,
television and publications in the dissemination of lawful information.
(c)	To coordinate the activities of all professional bodies of the
mass media
(d) 	To protect Nigerians against intrusions and unwarranted enquiries
into the private life of any person without his consent.
(e)	To deal with such other matters affecting the mass media including
code of conduct of mass media practitioners, professional and ethical
standards as the President may from time to time direct or the National
Assembly may by an Act prescribe.

Section 46(3) states: "In addition to the provisions of subsection (3) of
section 15 of this constitution, the ownership of any print, electronic or
other media organisation with interstate coverage other than those owned
by the Government of the Federation shall be by public companies only."

Section 46 (4) states: "It shall be the responsibility of the Board of
Directors of any public company to ensure the maintenance of balance (d)
reporting and promotion of national unity."

Why The National Mass Media Commission Should Be Expunged From The Draft
Constitution
There are several reasons why the idea of the Commission, another
regulatory body for the press, should be discarded.

1.	Another media regulatory body will be one regulatory body too many
and the correct boundary of the duties of each body will be very difficult
to ascertain. At present all the functions listed for the Commisssion are
being performed by a number of other bodies, including the Ministry of
Information, The Nigerian Press Council and the National Broadcasting
Commission. For example, the Nigerian Press Council set up by Decree No.
35 of 1992 has the responsibility of fostering achievement and maintaining
a high professional standard as well as inquiring into complaints about
the conduct of the press and of any person or organisation towards the
press. The National Broadcasting Commission set up by Decree No. 38 of
1992 is charged with the responsibility of regulating and controlling the
broadcast industry. The creation of the National Mass Media Commission
would, therefore, inevitably create conflict with existing agencies which,
to a larger or lesser extend, perform similar fun!
ctions.

2.	The Commission, going by its wide-ranging powers, is likely to be
seen as another gag agency, close in import to the Newspaper Registration
Board to which the press is categorically opposed. A free Press is one of
the importance pillars of democracy and to entrench in the Constitution
provisions for the creation of a censorship agencies is to undermine our
aspiration for genuine democracy.

3.	In realising national goals- economic, political and socials - the
government needs the cooperation and support of the press, but the
existence of punitive provisions such as this in our constitution will
affect relations between the government and the Press and drive a wedge
between them.  Of course, occasional disagreements between the press and
the government are healthy but to live like cat and mouse in mutual
suspicion and antagonism will not do the press, the government or the
nation any good.

4.	The Draft Constitution directs the Commission to assist the media
owners in the dissemination of "lawful information" but has not defined
"lawful information" which is obviously capable of being misinterpreted to
exclude public malfeasance or improprieties.

5.	The Commission is directed to protect individuals against media
harassment and intimidation, a function that is already being discharged
by the law courts and the Nigerian Press Council. If the Commission is
also assigned this responsibility it means that the media will be
subjected to double or even triple jeopardy.

It is not in the public interest for the Constitution to provide shield,
as it were, for public officials who wish to evade scrutiny of their
private and public conduct. That is what the Commission seeks to do by
asking the media to obtain the consent of a public official to enquire
into or to publish information concerning his private life.  It is obvious
that consent will never be granted.

One of the laudable goals of this government is its desire to enthrone a
government of accountability, probity and transparency. To this end it has
mounted a clean-up campaign code normal War Against Indiscipline and
Corruption (WAI-C), set up the Failed Bank Tribunal and the Failed
Contracts Tribunal. The insertion in the constitution of a provision that
seeks to protect the corrupt and crooked would appear to be inconsistent
with the goals of accountability, probity and transparency proposed by
this government since its inception.

It may not be known to the public but in professional media practice it is
a settled matter that a public official's private life does not enjoy any
immunity from scrutiny in so far as it affects or reflects on the
performance of his public duty. In that instance, it becomes a public duty
for the press to inquire into his private life. This provision is clearly
against accountability, public morality and good governance and is
therefore not in the public interest.

7.	The President is authorised in the Draft Constitution to direct
the commission from time to time on the code of conduct of media
practitioners and on professional and ethical standards. It is our view
that this ought not to be the proper responsibility of the President.
Codes of conduct are usually internally generated by the professional
bodies and in the case of the Press, it is rightly the responsibility of
the Nigerian Press Council to monitor the adherence of the Press to its
own code of conduct.

8	Section 46(3) that seeks to limit media "coverage" to only the
state which they are based except they are either federal government-owned
or they become public companies, will have the effect of undermining the
freedom-of-expression provision contained in section 40 of the 1995 Draft
Constitution. If coverage as defined here means either news gathering or
dissemination or both, the provision may have the devastating impact of
wiping away all the existing private radio, television, newspapers and
magazines for they cannot lawfully operate beyond their locale except they
become public companies.  This would be clearly discriminatory partly
because private ownership of property is a basic principle of the
Constitution and also because it is a provision that appears to apply only
to the media.

9.	Many Nigerian investors are basically interested in engaging in
businesses that can guarantee quick and vast returns on their investment.
But there are several enterprises which do not necessarily yield quick and
vast returns on investment but add a great deal of value to our life as a
nation because of their social significance. Policies that tend to
discourage investment in such vital but less lucrative areas may prove, in
the final analysis, harmful to balanced national growth. The media
enterprise is one such area.

10.	While the Commission may be able to restrict the local media in
their "coverage" to states in which they are located it may be near
impossible for it to restrict the reception of information on radio,
television, newspapers, magazines and even the Internet from foreign
sources. That limitation on the ability of the Commission will tend to
reduce its effectiveness in terms of policing information that is
available for public consumption. In the long run, Nigerians may get more
information about their country from foreign sources than from the local
media.

11.	Only a few years ago the government opened up the electronic media
to private enterprise thus making way for healthy competition which has
paid off in terms of improved performance. The action was also in line
with our liberation and free enterprise policy. Limiting the private media
to one state therefore would be a violation of our commitment to free
enterprise and privatisation and would amount to policy inconsistency. It
would also tend to undermine our effort at national unity by its
inadvertent emphasis on statism.

12.	The board of directors of a public company that is in publishing
has been saddled not simply with making policy that will enhance the
fortunes of the company but it is also asked to ensure that maintenance of
balanced reporting and promotion of national unity. This is an awesome
responsibility considering that most board members are not usually full
time members of an organisation. There is an implicit and misconceived
assumption that any board of directors is equipped with the expertise to
determine what is "balanced reporting".

13.	Democracy thrives on media pluralism and the veiled attempt to
restrict the operations of the private media must be seen as an effort to
restrict public access to information and to curtail the citizen's right
to the freedom to receive and impart information. In a society such an
ours where the people have enjoyed the benefits of media pluralism for a
long time, such an effort can lead to the elevation of rumour-mongering to
an art form and the appearance of more underground publications in the
streets.

14.	To restrict the free flow of information is a violation of
Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It
states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression.
This right includes freedom of hold opinion without interference and to
seek to receive and impart information and ideas through any media and
regardless of frontiers". Also the African Charter on Human and People's
Rights, Article 9 speaks in the same vein. Nigeria subscribes to these
provisions. These rights are also enshrined in section 36 of the 1979
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and section 40 of the 1995
Draft Constitution.

15.	Considering our problems with the international community and
local groups in respect of democracy and human rights whatever decisions
we take that affect such institutions as the press and judiciary should be
positive, not negative, if we are to purge ourselves of the stigma of
human rights violation.

16.	On the Press Court we believe that establishing the Press Court
will single out the press as the most irresponsible professional group in
the country. Although we admit that there are few bad eggs in the press
just as there are in other professions we do not think it is necessary to
culminate the entire press and paint it as the black sheep of the Nigerian
family. To do so would be to ignore the noble and patriotic contributions
that majority of the press had made in the past and are continuing to make
to the development and upliftment of Nigeria.

17.	The Press Court is an unnecessary duplication of functions and
efforts. The regular courts have adequate jurisdiction to deal with all
matters that could conceivably come under the purview of a press court.
There are laws of defamation, sedition, injurious falsehood, contempt,
obscenity etc. which the regular courts have the jurisdiction to deal
with.

The Nigerian Press Organisation (NPO) published the above in 1997, in
reaction to the provision for a National Mass Media Commission in the 1995
Draft Constitution.


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