News
ECOWAS Court Gives Judgment on Press Council Inconsistency with Human Rights Law
ECOWAS Court Gives Judgment on Press Council Inconsistency with Human Rights Law
By: Michael Mike
The ECOWAS Court of Justice has delivered its judgment in a case brought by two Nigerian journalists alleging the Nigerian Press Council Act of 1992 was discriminatory and violated their right to freedom of expression.
In its judgment delivered by Hon Justice Dupe Atoki, Judge Rapporteur, the Court declared that Sections 19 (1)(a), 27 and 37 of the Nigerian Press Council (NPC) Act failed to recognize public interest media including rights of online and citizen journalists thereby violating Article 9 (1) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), and Article 8 (1) and 10 (2) of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa.
The Court therefore ordered the government of Nigeria to amend these contested Sections to align with international practices that promote free, pluralistic and professional journalism. It however dismissed other claims which were not substantiated.
The case with suit number ECW/CCJ/APP/31/21 was filed on 14 June 2021 by lawyers representing the Applicants – Mr Isaac Olamikan and Mrs Edoghogho Ugberease – online and citizen journalists who practise journalism for the promotion of freedom of expression, opinion, and access to information.
In the application, they claimed that Sections 19(1)a, 27 and 37 of the Nigeria Press Council Act of 1992 requiring journalists to be at least 18 years and accredited by the NPC, 25 years to be an editor with working experience in reputable media organization or news agency and registered with the Nigeria Union of Journalists, discriminated against them.
The Applicants’ lawyers led by Mr President Aigbokhan argued that these Sections failed to recognise public interest media such as the rights of online and citizen journalists and were therefore discriminatory and violated their right to freedom of expression as guaranteed under Articles 2 and 9(1) of the ACHPR, Article 19 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR), Articles 2, 10 and 19 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 8 (1) and 10 (2) of the Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression in Africa; and breached the State’s obligation under the ECOWAS Treaty among other cited texts.
“For example, Section 37 of the Press Council Act, puts the minimum age to practice journalism as 18 years of age, while to be qualified as an editor, requires a minimum of 25 years of age. Sections 19(a) and 27 of the Act imposes educational qualifications and compulsory courses of attendance and training before a person can be recognized and allowed to practice as a journalist,” the judgment stated.
They also submitted that they were arrested separately at different locations while investigating and gathering information for their work, and that their arrest and detention were unlawful and violated their rights.
The Applicants asked the Court to order the Respondent to amend the contested Sections of the NPC Act to align with international practice and pay 1,000,000 (one million) USD as damages.
On their part, the Respondent’s lawyers Mrs Maimuna Lami Shiru and Mrs B.J. Oladipo told the Court that ‘journalism is a sensitive profession requiring mastery as well as regulation to prevent negative effect, adding that rights to information and freedom of expression are not absolute.’
The Respondent denied arresting and detaining the Applicants unlawfully, stating that the first Applicant was arrested because his action had national security implications while the second Applicant operated illegally.
They added that, in the same way as other professional bodies, there were criteria for registration and membership as journalists, and urged the Court to dismiss the case describing it as frivolous, baseless and an abuse of court process.
In its analysis, the Court determined if the matter was within its mandate, if it was admissible and if the Sections of the NPC Act were discriminatory and violated the right to freedom of expression of the Applicants. Relying on its rules of procedure and jurisprudence, the Court held the matter was within its jurisdiction and the case was admissible.
On the alleged violation of Article 2 of ACHPR the Court noted that the Applicants did not substantiate on how they were treated differently in an identical or similar situation. Consequently, it held that their rights to freedom from discrimination under Article 2 of ACHPR has not been violated.
While on the alleged violation of Article 9 (freedom of expression), the Court noted that Section 19(1) and Section 27 of the Press Act imposing minimum educational requirement, age limit and registration, were restrictive and interfered with the right to freedom of expression, and therefore violated Article 9 (2).
In reaching its decision, the Court also noted the impact of technology in the evolving media space with the advent of citizen journalists, influencers and content creators who share news, commentary, and analysis on social issues. Though not qualified in traditional sense, they contributed to shaping public opinion.
It drew inspiration from young activists notably Malala Yousafzai and Greta Thunberg who in their teens integrated online media in their advocacy and have attained world recognition through a free and unrestricted opportunity to gather information and express opinion.
Regarding the Applicants’ claim of unlawful arrest and detention, the Court noted that the Applicants did not prove their arrest was unlawful. Consequently, the Court dismissed their claims of unlawful arrest and request for compensation.
Both parties were ordered to bear their costs of litigation.
Also on the bench were Hon Justices Edward Amoako Asante (presiding) and Sengu M. Koroma (Member).
ECOWAS Court Gives Judgment on Press Council Inconsistency with Human Rights Law
News
Seven dead, five injured in multiple-vehicle crash along Lokoja–Abuja highway
Seven dead, five injured in multiple-vehicle crash along Lokoja–Abuja highway
By: Zagazola Makama
At least seven persons were killed and five others injured on Tuesday morning in a multiple-vehicle collision along the Lokoja–Abuja highway near Gadabiu Village, Kwali Local Government Area of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
Sources told Zagazola Makama that the accident occurred at about 9:00 a.m. when a Howo truck, with registration number ANC 665 XA, driven by one Adamu of Tafa Local Government Area, Kaduna State, lost control and rammed into three stationary vehicles parked along the road.
The affected vehicles included a Golf 3 (GWA 162 KZ), another Golf and a Sharon vehicle.The drivers of the three stationary vehicles are yet to be identified.
The sources said the Howo truck had been travelling from Okaki in Kogi State to Tafa LGA in Kaduna State when the incident occurred. Seven victims reportedly died on the spot, while five sustained various degrees of injuries, including fractures.
The injured were rushed to Abaji General Hospital, where they are receiving treatment. The corpses of the deceased have been released to their families for burial according to Islamic rites.
The police have advised motorists to exercise caution on highways and called on drivers to ensure their vehicles are roadworthy to prevent similar accidents in the future.
Seven dead, five injured in multiple-vehicle crash along Lokoja–Abuja highway
News
How misdiagnosis, narratives are fuelling Nigeria’s banditry escalation
How misdiagnosis, narratives are fuelling Nigeria’s banditry escalation
By: Zagazola Makama
Nigeria’s banditry crisis is no longer escalating simply because armed groups are growing bolder. It is escalating because the country continues to misdiagnose the threat, apply blunt policy tools to differentiated actors, and unintentionally feed a violent criminal economy through ransom payments, politicised narratives and delayed state consolidation.
Across the North-West and parts of the North-Central, banditry has evolved beyond rural violence into a structured, profit-driven security threat. Yet public debate remains trapped between emotional appeals for dialogue and absolutist calls for force, leaving little room for the strategic clarity required to halt the violence.
At the heart of the escalation is money. Banditry today survives on a diversified revenue architecture that includes ransom payments, cattle rustling, illegal mining, arms trafficking, extortion levies on farming and mining communities, and collaboration with transnational criminal networks. Each successful kidnapping or “peace levy” reinforces the viability of violence as a business model.
Data released by the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) in December 2024 underlined the scale of this economy with the North-West accounting for the highest number of kidnap incidents and victims.
Zagazola argue that as long as communities remain unprotected and ransom payments continue as a survival strategy, banditry will regenerate faster than military operations can suppress it. This is not ideology-driven violence at its core; it is cash-flow-driven criminality as every payment funds the next attack.
Another accelerant is Nigeria’s persistent failure to differentiate categories of armed actors. Security assessments increasingly point to at least two distinct groups operating within the banditry ecosystem.
The first consists of low-level, defensive armed actors, often rural residents who acquired weapons after suffering attacks and whose violence is reactive rather than predatory. The second group comprises entrenched, profit-driven bandit networks responsible for mass kidnappings, village destruction, sexual violence, arms trafficking and territorial control.
Yet public discourse and policy responses frequently collapse these actors into a single category of “bandits,” resulting in indiscriminate dialogue offers, blanket amnesty rhetoric or, conversely, broad-brush security operations that alienate communities. This conceptual error, allows high-value criminal leaders to masquerade as aggrieved actors while exploiting negotiations to buy time, regroup and rearm.
Dialogue has repeatedly been applied in contexts where the state lacks coercive leverage. Experiences in Zamfara, Katsina, Sokoto and Kaduna states and parts of the North-West show a consistent pattern: temporary reductions in violence following peace deals, followed by rapid relapse and escalation. Officials who participated in the dialogue have openly acknowledged that many agreements collapsed within months.
The negotiations conducted without sustained military pressure, intelligence dominance and post-agreement enforcement mechanisms merely incentivise armed groups to pause tactically. When criminals negotiate from a position of strength, dialogue becomes appeasement.
Perhaps the most dangerous accelerant is the ethnicisation of banditry. Although criminal gangs include actors of identifiable ethnic backgrounds, the violence itself is not driven by ethnic grievance. Nonetheless, selective media framing and political rhetoric like what had been witnessed in Plateau have increasingly cast banditry through identity lenses, particularly in farmer–herder contexts.
This framing obscures the criminal logic of the violence and deepens mistrust between communities that are themselves victims. In Nigeria today, the fulani herdsmen and pastoralists communities are being weaponized and stereotyped as bandits. This dangerous persecution has strengthens bandit recruitment narratives, allowing criminal leaders to cloak profit-driven violence in claims of ethnic persecution or genocide.
Historical records and sociological studies show that Fulani, Hausa, Tiv, Berom and other communities coexisted for decades through complementary economic systems. The breakdown of this coexistence has been exploited by armed groups seeking cover, recruits and informants. Security agencies possess significantly more intelligence on bandit networks than is visible in public debate. Lawful interceptions, human intelligence and post-operation assessments routinely reveal financial motives, supply routes and internal hierarchies within armed groups.
However, public advocacy for dialogue often relies on forest-level engagements that security officials describe as “theatrical performances” by bandits choreographed grievances designed to elicit sympathy and concessions. The disconnect between classified intelligence and public narratives has allowed emotionally compelling but strategically flawed arguments to dominate national discourse.
Another escalation factor is the emerging convergence between bandit networks and ideological terrorist groups as Nigeria’s internal security landscape firmly indicates that what has long been treated as banditry especially in the North-West and parts of North-Central Nigeria has evolved into a hybrid jihadist campaign, driven by Boko Haram (JAS faction) and reinforced by JNIM elements operating from Sahelian-linked forest sanctuaries. Shared arms supply chains, training exchanges and joint operations could transform banditry from criminal violence into full-spectrum insurgency if unchecked. Nigeria’s past experience with Boko Haram demonstrates the cost of dismissing such convergence as isolated or exaggerated.
Military operations have succeeded in degrading bandit camps in several corridors, but the absence of immediate governance has allowed violence to recycle. Clearing operations not followed by permanent security presence, functional courts, reopened schools, healthcare and markets leave vacuums that criminal actors quickly refill. Bandits and other criminals thrive where state authority is episodic rather than continuous. Security victories without governance consolidation merely displace violence spatially and temporally.
Therefore, Nigeria must urgently reset its approach by formally adopting threat differentiation, choking financial lifelines, regulating community defence structures, and ensuring intelligence-led, precise enforcement against high-risk criminal networks. Dialogue, they say, must be selective, conditional and embedded within formal disarmament and reintegration frameworks not deployed as a moral reflex.
Above all, the state must reclaim narrative control by defining banditry clearly as organised criminal violence, not a sociological misunderstanding. As one senior official put it, “Banditry escalates where sentiment overrides strategy. The cure begins with honesty.”
Without that honesty, Nigeria risks allowing a violent criminal economy to entrench itself deeper into the country’s security architecture at a cost measured not just in money, but in lives, legitimacy and national cohesion.
How misdiagnosis, narratives are fuelling Nigeria’s banditry escalation
News
ISWAP kills 10 JAS fighters in Kukawa as rivalry clashes escalates
ISWAP kills 10 JAS fighters in Kukawa as rivalry clashes escalates
By: Zagazola Makama
No fewer than 10 fighters of the Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad (JAS) were killed on Jan. 8 during a night attack by the rival Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) at Dabar Ledda, within the Doron Naira axis of Kukawa Local Government Area (LGA) of Borno State.
Security sources told Zagazola Makama that ISWAP fighters launched a surprise assault on a JAS checkpoint, locally referred to as an Irasa, in the Dabar Ledda area, overwhelming the position after a brief but intense clash.
Sources familiar with developments in the area told Zagazola Makama that the attack ended decisively in ISWAP’s favour, with about 10 JAS fighters killed. Following the operation, ISWAP elements were said to have withdrawn swiftly to their major stronghold located between Kangarwa and Dogon Chuku, also within Kukawa LGA.
Both group has, in recent years, focused on degrading each other’s capabilities in an attempt to consolidate control over key corridors around Lake Chad as well as Sambisa Forest.
However, the latest clash is expected to trigger a violent response. Intelligence reports suggest that JAS leadership, acting on directives allegedly issued by Abu Umaima, has ordered mobilisation of fighters across the northern and central parts of the Lake Chad region of Borno (LCRBA) in preparation for retaliatory attacks.
The planned counter-offensive could lead to an upsurge in large-scale attacks in the days and weeks ahead, particularly around the Kangarwa–Dogon Chuku corridor, an area that has witnessed repeated factional battles due to its strategic value for logistics, recruitment and access routes.
While the infighting has historically weakened Boko Haram/ISWAP overall cohesion, Zagazola caution that intensified clashes often come at a heavy cost to civilians, as armed groups raid communities for supplies, conscripts and intelligence. Kukawa LGA, already battered by years of insurgency, remains highly vulnerable whenever such rivalries escalate.
ISWAP kills 10 JAS fighters in Kukawa as rivalry clashes escalates
-
News2 years agoRoger Federer’s Shock as DNA Results Reveal Myla and Charlene Are Not His Biological Children
-
Opinions4 years agoTHE PLIGHT OF FARIDA
-
News9 months agoFAILED COUP IN BURKINA FASO: HOW TRAORÉ NARROWLY ESCAPED ASSASSINATION PLOT AMID FOREIGN INTERFERENCE CLAIMS
-
Opinions4 years agoPOLICE CHARGE ROOMS, A MINTING PRESS
-
News2 years agoEYN: Rev. Billi, Distortion of History, and The Living Tamarind Tree
-
ACADEMICS2 years agoA History of Biu” (2015) and The Lingering Bura-Pabir Question (1)
-
Columns2 years agoArmy University Biu: There is certain interest, but certainly not from Borno.
-
Opinions2 years agoTinubu,Shettima: The epidemic of economic, insecurity in Nigeria
