In Lagos, Journalists Parley Over Media Bill
The Media Practice Enhancement Bill has just passed through its first reading in the House of Representatives. However, because of certain sections that have attracted controversies both for and against the bill, the Lagos State Council of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), on Tuesday organised a one-day seminar where journalists brainstormed on how the bill if passed would eventually shape their future. Olawale Olaleye and Bisi Lawal, who attended the seminar report
With stead, strong-will and tenacity of purpose, it appears the Media Practice Enhancement Bill may have begun its long awaited journey to a successful law in Nigeria. Naturally, like any such bill that draws national concern, put differently, those bills that are usually rail-road with legislative razzmatazz, the stormy stages the media bill seems to be going through are not unexpected. Here, privacy of individuals, national security, investments of groups or individuals in the name of media houses are involved, thus interests are high.
Before now, it has not been an easy task, canvassing the bill and making it a subject of discourse in the country. In other words, the passing of the first reading could not have been fun-like. The sponsor of the Bill, Hon. Abike Dabiri, the chairman, House committee on media and publicity has had it tough in ensuring that the bill scales the legislative hurdles. The tide, but for quick arrest of situation, was at a point, almost turned against her.
For instance, a national daily at a time, once reported that the bill was merely a draconian bill which was not going to serve any purpose. Even it was alledged that Dabiri had only sponsored an anti-press bill. The report, immediately brewed misgivings and resentment against the person of the lawmaker whose dreams would be to see the bill passed into law. But, because she is known to be a pro-active person, perhaps by virtue of her professional background as a sesoned journalist, Dabiri swung into action and gave a true picture of what the bill if eventually passed into law, would serve the nation. And so, the resentment was given mercy-killing.
However, slowly, but steadily, the bill is inching towards a notable end. Having passed through the first reading in the House, the second reading will, undoubtedly, be demanding as pragmatic understanding of some aspects of the bill would be expected. Such areas include the number of postgraduate experience expected of an editor of a newspaper, the issues of salary payment, the controversies surrounding proper work condition, the issue of investigative journalism and its restrictions, the privacy of individuals as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution, arguments advanced in support of national security, the issue of professionalism as in the form and contents of reports and several other sundry issues.
Interestingly, the seminar organised by Lagos State Chapter of the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ) made an interesting insight and perhaps, gave close answers and suggestions to some of the points raised. Even more interesting, was the ability of the council to be able to assemble together, the calibre of people who attended the seminar to discuss the future of a profession most revered and held in high esteem by the society. With such people as the Chairman, Guardian Editorial Board, Dr. Reuben Abati, National President of NUJ, Mr. Smart Adeyemi, Exective Director, National Orientation Agency, NOA, Otunba Segun Runsewe, Mrs. Ajayi Gbadebo and NUJ National Secretary Liman Shuaib, among others, it became obvious that the union may have tactically set in motion a pragmatic approach in addressing some of the contentious issues raised in the bill.
One after the other, they (journalists) followed suit to marshall their arguments with respects to those grey areas already identified. They did not just argue in principles but even went ahead to proffer professional advise that could remedy the bill in case of any eventuality.
In her presentation, Dabiri agreed that having gone through the bill and in terms of what it tends to offer, there was actually the need to have it reworked. Being the sponsor, it became understandable why she concluded that there was every reason to have the bill looked into again. She expressed happiness over the success recorded by the bill during its first reading, which she said was a huge success.
Expectedly, Dabiri identified those contentious sections of the bill to include the experience required of an editor of a newspaper, issue of salaries, registration of journalists and the deposit, work condition and other sundry matters. She, however, came to the conclusion that the bill needed to be reviewed and reworked in order to achieve expected result.
Abati, who was the moderator and who spoke intermitently, however, noted that journalists had to make up their minds on whether or not the bill should continue, especially now that it has reached the second reading.
He implored his colleagues to make contributions and input in the passage of the bill because they are the ones directly concerned. Though, as the moderator, he spoke almost throughout the event, adding or removing from virtually every contribution.
On her part, Mrs. Ajayi Gbadebo spoke on what she expected the bill to achieve when it eventually becomes enacted. She contended that, given the issues raised in the bill, there was the need for a broader participation of other stakeholders, whose interests are equally at stake. Her argument is that when newspaper proprietors for instance, are asked to reserve some amount of money in the bank for contingencies sake, such media executives who are directly involved should have been invited to be part of the discussion in order to have their own impact evaluated and implemented as policies.
She also spoke on the need to protect the profession and therefore argued that the ten years stipulation was not, on her part, too much a criterion "because if anyone could not put up to ten years in a profession, then why call it a profession"?, she asked.
Gbadebo was of the view that journalism is not like any commodity that can be dispensed with when not wanted, but noted that when an information gets to the public, no matter the level of damage done, it cannot be recalled, not any more.
Otunba Segun Runsewe, who claimed to have tasted every aspect of the profession said while he appreciated the concern of those who had in one way or the other condemned the bill, it was expected that whatever would turn out to be the success story of the bill would at inception, encounter certain hitches, some of which he claimed, the bill may have been undergoing. He was, however, not happy that journalists could go against what was meant to benefit them.
Mr. Dapo Olorunyomi contended that in summary, the bill sought to betray the ideals and objective it intended to achieve as a project. For instance, he pointed out such areas as access to information, investigative reporting and subtle endorsement of existing restricting blocs such as privacy and national security. His argument was anchored on the fact that if the bill was genuinely meant to engender free press in its real sense, then such restrictions must be yanked off otherwise, the effort may be in futility.
Chairman of the Lagos NUJ, Mrs. Funke Fadugba who had spoken earlier, justified the need for the bill saying, "the average journalist in Nigeria today, apart from having to contend with harassment and unlawful detention by the State Security Service (SSS) as witnessed at the Insider Weekly magazine and Global Star newspaper, has been turned to a scavenger of sort and a labourer not worthy of a wage".
But on the contrary, she said members of the public expected that journalists should be responsible, ethically upright and professionally mobile, but that instead such people have not bothered to show concern on the declining abuse of such journalists' rights to earn his agreed salary or wage as at when due including the provision of a conducive atmosphere capable of enhancing his practice.
Based on that, several other journalists, who were keen on contributing to the success of the bill spoke extensively about some of the impediments raised in the bill and the need for such loopholes to be addressed. They, however, in principle agreed to have the bill reworked and reviewed to have those areas lagging behind incorporated such that the rights of the journalists, if passed would not only be guaranteed, but their condition of work properly monitored, thereby giving the profession a better image different from whatever it looked like in the past.
The issue of free press is though, as old as the history of human creation, differences however ranges from society to society.
Without much ado, it is sacrosanct therefore, that journalists deserve a better living condition both in the areas of operation and private life.
Anything less would not have betrayed the tenets of a just and fair society, but have destroyed the essence of democracy, especially in a toddler democracy as Nigeria's.
|
