 Welcome back. The International Press Center has kicked against attempts by the government to criminalize journalism in the country, urging media professionals to fight before it is too late, and media houses end up becoming an extension of the Ministry of Information. Executive Director of the Center, Landry Arogu-Dade, noted that the two major bills before the National Assembly, which court-creeple press freedom in Nigeria, are the National Broadcasting Commission Amendment Bill and the Nigerian Press Council Act Amendment Bill. And also, the Social Economic Rights and Accountability Project, CERAP, has sold the federal government and the Ministry of Information and Culture, Lai Mohamed, over the directive to all broadcast stations in the country to suspend the use of Twitter. We have joining us, Kola Waleolua, Deputy Director of CERAP. We are expecting David Houdain, a journalist, to join us also in the course of the show. Many things. Once again, Kola Waleolua, Dari. Let's start off with what we read all over the press just yesterday. That's your organization, and CERAP is serene, the Minister of Information, Lai Mohamed, the federal government, that's even the president, over this issue of alleged gagging of the press through the suspension of a Twitter on their platforms. Just run us through it so we can understand you better. Okay, thank you very much. To provide context, the suit that was filed last week at the Federal Court is different from the one filed before now at the Air Force Court. The suit filed at the Air Force Court challenges the ban itself, and that was filed before the judicial staff, of course, called on their strike. We had also filed an application for provisional measures, which would qualify for interim order to stop the government from going ahead with the ban, or, excuse me, not harassing anyone from using Twitter. But the suit that was filed last week is different. It speaks to the attempt of the National Broadcasting Commission to compare media and broadcast houses in Nigeria to deactivate your Twitter account, and that is why we have approached the Federal High Court to set aside that potentially on lawful direction from the NBC. It is important to note that the directive is not backed by any law, and it's clearly on lawful on the part of the NBC, even though it proposes to act under the NBC Court. All right, let's talk about what happened at the National Assembly just last week. The Minister of Information, Lai Mohammed, appeared before the House of Representatives, where they are planning to amend them. There are five different those, specifically, two of them, Heat Home, that's the Press Council Act, and, of course, the NBC Amendment Act. Let's talk about this for one minute, and let's know how you react, because a whole lot of reactions have thrilled that particular development, because people are seeing it as another way of censoring journalists in Nigeria, and specifically, the Minister is asking that them social media and, of course, its regulation be added to the NBC. What we have seen that this government has done or tried to do is to generate clampdown on political expression. That aspect, there's an aspect of that clampdown, of course, that affects the media as a key part of the Nigerian state, but the totality of the actions type of freedom of expression, both among citizens and from media houses. And the antecedent of this government's fix-set to that fact, the NBC has, time and again, whipped up the NBC Court to stop media houses from doing their job, and that is on the aspect of the media. And so we've seen also the attempt at having some kind of legislation to make this a free speech, not as a free social media. All these attacks we must understand is against federal expression, but they are component facts to each of these actions. We've seen the social media bill, we've seen the 8th speech bill, and we've seen the NGO bill, all of which have failed at the public hearing stage, at the national assembly. And so it is not surprising that coming on the use of the purported Twitter ban, we've seen this government do this. And it's also important to stress that this is not a media reaction. This is a well-organized plan on the part of this administration to prevent whatever you perceive as critical views of government. Of course, this is ill-informed. This is not an interest of democracy or in the interest of good governance in itself. So coming on the use of the Twitter ban, we've seen government attempt to amend the press council bill, which have been thrown out with us before now, and opportune to amend the NBC Act to give it powers to regulate the social media. But that is not, that these moves are not in the interest of democracy. Democracy, of course, implies the people participate, not only at election, but in the governance that follows after election. And one of the ways they can do this, of course, you have an open line to not only to talk to those who are in government, but also to express their views, whether positive or negative, about various aspects of governance. And social media being a very key tool to do that. We see no basis for this regulation of social media, and ultimately it's going to be anti-democratic. And so what we respect from the National Assembly at this point is to throw out those bills as they have done in the past, and not let them sail through. All right. I just want to read out something that just happened at the National Assembly just today, because the Senate also reacted officially, and they said, okay, let me just read them verbatim here. The Senate has officially reacted to the controversy trillion, the move to amend the National Broadcasting Commission Act, and the Press Council Act. Senator, representing Osho Central and Chairman, Senate Committee on Media and Publicity Bashirajibullah said, the amendment of the two bills was not meant to creep or press freedom. Are the public hearing and to be able to amend the Nigerian Broadcasting Commission Act, organized House committees on information, effects, and values, ministers of information and culture, Mohammed, Azzaq's the lawmakers to include internet broadcasting under the control of the NBC. But speaking today in Abuja, the National Assembly said that claim that it was meant to check excesses of those he called reckless and irresponsible media establishment. Do you agree with that? Specifically, he said it was meant to check the excesses of those he called reckless and irresponsible media establishment. Of course, that cannot be true. And if it is to check what is called reckless, why do we need to criminalize this speech? And if we're expressing the opinions, would that mean there are no laws that take you of whatever is deemed reckless, either by a media practitioner or by any citizen? The last time I checked, Mengera has laws, a case, libel, and the permission. They are civil wrongs, and they could be tortured and prosecuted in such cases. We've seen the way the government has used these type of acts, seemingly innocent, against citizens who have expressed their views. Even going as far as using the terrorism act, which of course was not designed to undo such offenses, charging people before the courts for terrorism, nearly for expressing their views, is that in this the government or agencies you want to give power to regulate the price, that's what STWM, given that very important task in section 22 of the Constitution, not only to hold government to account, but as a tool to disseminate information freely between the citizens and the government. If this statement is attributed to the National Assembly, of course, it cannot be true. We only see this as a means of fighting against law of expression, stopping any form of dissenting view, and silencing any kind of perceived critical views that a government cannot find accessible. All right, granted, your organization, CERAP, has actually sued the federal government, even the president, in all of these issues. But then, what would you really advise some journalists to do? Because the federal government comes out and says that journalists should not, or media houses should actually take down their Twitter account in as much as there's no law to that effect. What can they do? Do they just have to follow hook, line, and sinker, and then just abide or they should maybe oppose and wait for some messiah, maybe like the CERAP and other organizations are doing right now? Yeah, we cannot afford to wait for any lie. It can be true, it can either be late in common or not common at all. We apparently, the architects of our own destiny, and in this case, any unlawful act of the government cannot stand. What CERAP has done is to approach the courts to give a formal decision on this point, because you can call it the formality of announcement, but we know as it stands that there is no law that permits the national progressive commission to do what it has to do, given directing to media houses to stop using Twitter to that media account. And the first thing is that that's the private business of these media houses, whether they choose to use Twitter or any kind of social media platform in accordance with the work that they do. That is, from that directive, it's patently unlawful and we are very hopeful that the court will make the necessary directive. As it stands, there is no law that gives the entity power to do that. Okay, let me put it in here. Let me put it in here colorally. You just said there is no law that empowers the federal government to go on with such a directive. Knowing all of this, judging by the fact that we have a minister of justice, we have a minister of justice, an attorney general of the federation, who would come out and say that Nigerians should not even use other alternatives to go on the Twitter platform. Where is this really taking us or keeping us as a country? Are we going back to the medieval ages, or where exactly are we headed? I was about to make that one that we've seen also an instance from the pronouncements of the Attorney General of the Federation where he was credited to have said that any media fan to be using Twitter, by other means, possibly by use of the VPN, will be prosecuted. But from the popular outflow of the people, none of what we've seen senior lawyers come out to destroy the justice when it didn't set up. We've seen the Attorney General, he can't do that statement assailingly, he did not say such a thing. And I'm very, very sure that this will go the same way of the NBC directive. NBC has moved forward, particularly when the so-called Twitter ban is being challenged in various parts, not only by Sarah, but by other groups in court. The least one would expect government to do is to maintain status quo by not taking law into its own hands. But what do you expect? We've seen the same government, the same administration, surveying law for other parts time and again. We've seen the same government and shown others given by the court for them to do specific acts and treat them with disdain. So what can we expect? But ultimately, we are very hopeful that a rule of law will prevail and the judiciary will come to the rescue of the citizens of this country and make decisions that that in line with the prohibitions of our law. As it is, the executive cannot create offences by mere pronouncing the law is really clear in this regard. And the one need not be a lawyer to identify the puns made in Section 36 of the Constitution. No one, no one can be punished from the offences that is not provided for by any written law. And there is no law to lie if that's presently. At any rate, the directive of the NBC that propels from the, on the NBC court stands very uneffective and inconsistent with the provisions of inspections at the now of the Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of expression to every individual, including those of media outlets. And the law is saying that that in the type of constitutional democracy that we practice in India, that even if any other law is inconsistent or conflicts with the provisions of the Constitution or what's that law to the extent of its inconsistency the body. And that means that the NBC court and even the NBC acts under which the NBC acting cannot stand against the provisions of Section 22 of the Constitution and Section 39 of the Constitution that's guaranteeing again the freedom of expression. All right, thank you so much. I'll call our lawyer, Oluwa Dari, deputy director of CERAP. Thanks for sharing your thought. And of course, I'm enlightening Nigerians on what they need to know concerning this issue of alleged gagging of the Nigerian media space. We do appreciate your time. Thank you. All right, we'll take a short break. And when we return, I'll be giving you my take, but right back, stay with us. Now the call for the holistic restructuring of Nigeria has reached a crescendo reverberating across the national space where some have obstinately turned deaf ears to it. Nigeria can no longer be ruled the way it is being against the ethos of equity and justice was still under a democratic dispensation. But then for the media censorship, the present administration appears to be exploring all avenues to regulate the media, particularly online media. On June 4, the Minister of Information and Culture announced a ban of Twitter a few days after the microblogging site removed a tweet by President Buhari for breaching its rose. In my opinion, the Twitter suspension and the moves to censor social media would stifle freedom of expression and shrink the Nigerian civic space. My name is Justin. Many thanks for being a part of the show. Bye for now.