If one is to do justice to any subject's discrepancies, one must be in a position to suggest alternatives. This is what we want to do with some of the repressive aspects of the media bill under scrutiny.

Let's look at the registration of journalists. The NACIP final document recommended the facilitation of the registration of newspapers and called for journalists to be free from harassment. The media bill changed that recommendation and came up with registration and licensing. Is this facilitation or a deliberate attempt to penalise?

The Nigerian registration process is as follows: 1. 'It is the duty of the Secretary to maintain a list of accredited journalists submitted by the Nigeria Union of Journalists. 2. The Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) shall from time to time submit to the Council a list for registration'.

Let's turn to the membership of the body that concerns journalists as envisaged by the bill that was passed last Thursday. It has the following membership: A Chairman appointed by the President; the PS [Permanent Secretary] Department[ of State] responsible for Information; one representative of the Gambia Press Union; one representative of the Teachers' Union; one representative of the Christian Council; one representative of the Women's Bureau; the Director of GRTS; one representative of the Bar Association and the Executive Secretary.

Let's look at the membership in Nigeria: the Chairman appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Minister based on the submission of the Nigeria Press Organisation; four (4) representatives of the NUJ; tworepresentatives of the Nigerian Guild of Editors; two representatives of the Newspaper Publishers' Association who shall be practising journalists; one representative of the Ministry of Information who shall be a practising journalist; two representatives of the Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria; one representative of the News Agency of Nigeria who shall be a practising journalist and the Secretary of the Council.

As can be seen, by adopting such an anti-free press media commission, our government is demonstrating antagonism towards private media practitioners in this country.

We have clamoured on top of our voices that the bill is inimical to the development of a free society, as it seeks to defranchise journalists from upholding their constitutional mandate to make government accountable to the people that elected it.

The first papers that appeared in the UK did so under fully-fledged monarchical rule. The Nigeria's Babangida military government was alive to the principle of a free press.

Our government chooses not to. We intend to challenge that posture.

(The Point, Wednesday, 8 May 2002)
(Reprinted with permission)