Press Freedom and Legal Guarantees in Nigeria

The Meaning of Press Freedom

Press freedom refers to the right of media organisations, journalists, and individuals to gather, report, and disseminate information without undue interference, censorship, or control by the government, political authorities, or other powerful institutions. It is a cornerstone of democracy, ensuring that citizens have access to information necessary for informed decision-making, holding public officials accountable, and fostering debate on societal issues. According to McQuail (2010), press freedom also implies the autonomy of the media to critique governments, expose corruption, and champion human rights.

Press freedom, however, does not mean absolute freedom. Ethical journalism, accuracy, and responsibility are essential to prevent misinformation, defamation, and the abuse of this freedom.

Difference Between Freedom of Expression and Press Freedom

Freedom of Expression

• Definition: Freedom of expression is the broader right of every individual to hold opinions, express ideas, and communicate information without interference, restriction, or censorship. It is a human right guaranteed to all citizens.

• Scope: It applies to everyone, including private citizens, bloggers, students, activists, and the general public not just journalists or media organisations.

• Legal Basis in Nigeria: Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria guarantees:

  “Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.”

• Limitations: Freedom of expression is not absolute. It is restricted to prevent defamation, incitement of violence, hate speech, national security threats, or infringement on others’ rights.

Example: A citizen posting a critical opinion about government policy on social media exercises freedom of expression.

2. Press Freedom

• Definition: Press freedom is a more specific right that applies to the media and journalists, allowing them to gather, report, and publish news without undue interference or censorship from government authorities or powerful entities.

• Scope: It is primarily concerned with media organisations and journalists. While it protects the media’s activities, it also indirectly protects public access to information.

• Legal Basis in Nigeria: Also anchored in Section 39 of the Constitution, but reinforced by media-specific regulations and international standards (e.g., Article 19 of the ICCPR).

• Limitations: Press freedom may be limited for reasons of national security, public order, protection of reputation, or ethical journalism standards. It is more regulated than general freedom of expression because journalists have professional responsibilities.

Example: A newspaper investigating corruption in government ministries exercises press freedom. The government cannot arbitrarily shut it down or arrest the journalists for reporting factual information.

 

Key Differences Summary

Feature	Freedom of Expression	Press Freedom
Scope	All individuals	Media organisations and journalists
Focus	Expressing opinions and ideas freely	Gathering, reporting, and publishing news
Legal Protections	Section 39, Constitution (1999)	Section 39, Constitution (1999), plus media regulations
Limitations	Hate speech, defamation, security risks	Same as above, but with professional/ethical duties for journalists
Example	Social media post by a citizen	Investigative reporting by a newspaper

---

In essence, freedom of expression is the universal right to speak, while press freedom is the specialised right to inform society through the media. Press freedom is therefore a subset of the broader freedom of expression, with added professional responsibilities and safeguards for society

3.2 History of Press Freedom

The concept of press freedom has evolved over centuries, largely shaped by struggles between state authorities and the emerging public sphere:

1. Early Origins – In the 17th century, the printing press revolution in Europe facilitated the dissemination of ideas. The English Star Chamber curtailed free expression, prompting early advocacy for freedom of the press (Siebert, Peterson, & Schramm, 1956).

2. Enlightenment Influence – Philosophers like John Milton, John Locke, and Voltaire argued that free expression was essential for truth and social progress. The English Bill of Rights (1689) provided early guarantees against censorship.

3. 19th and 20th Centuries – With industrialisation and mass literacy, newspapers became influential tools for public debate. In the U.S., the First Amendment (1791) constitutionally protected freedom of the press, while similar movements in Europe and colonies emerged over the 19th and 20th centuries.

4. African Context – During colonial rule, press freedom in Africa was heavily restricted, as newspapers were often censored to protect colonial interests. After independence, countries like Nigeria and Ghana included press freedom in their constitutions, though enforcement varied.

3.3 Constitutional Guarantees of Freedom of the Press

• United States of America (USA): The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (1791) guarantees press freedom, stating that “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” This provides strong protection, though laws on libel, obscenity, and national security create limits.

• United Kingdom (UK): The UK does not have a single constitutional document. Press freedom is protected under common law, statutes like the Human Rights Act 1998, and conventions, especially Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

• Europe: Across Europe, press freedom is enshrined in the ECHR (Article 10) and national constitutions, which allow for restrictions only in cases such as national security, public safety, or protection of reputation.

• Africa: Many African constitutions, post-independence, guarantee press freedom. For example, the South African Constitution (1996) explicitly protects freedom of expression, including the press. However, colonial-era and post-colonial governments often restricted media freedoms.

• Nigeria: Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria guarantees freedom of expression and the press, stating: “Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.”

3.4 Limits to Freedom of the Press in Nigeria

Despite constitutional guarantees, press freedom in Nigeria faces legal, political, and social constraints:

1. Legal Restrictions: The Nigerian Criminal Code, Cybercrimes Act (2015), and Official Secrets Act place limits on reporting, especially on national security or defamatory content.

2. Political Pressures: Governments have historically used threats, arrests, or shutdowns to control media narratives.

3. Economic Constraints: Ownership concentration and dependence on state or political funding may influence editorial independence.

4. Ethical Responsibilities: Press freedom is limited by the need to avoid defamation, incitement, hate speech, and misinformation.

Cases of Press Marginalization and Oppression in Nigeria

1. Decree No. 4 of 1984 (Press Censorship under Buhari/Idiagbon regime): This military decree empowered the government to proscribe newspapers, censor content, and detain journalists, severely limiting media independence. After the military coup of December 31, 1983, which brought Major General Muhammadu Buhari to power, the regime adopted a strict authoritarian approach to governance. Decree No. 4 of 1984, officially titled the State Security (Detention of Persons) Decree, was implemented to control “subversive” elements, but its scope extended heavily into media operations.

Purpose and Provisions: The decree allowed the government to detain individuals without trial for up to six months and empowered security agencies to suppress publications deemed “prejudicial to public order or national security.” Newspapers could be proscribed outright, and journalists were subject to arrest for articles critical of government policies. 

 Impact on the Press: Many newspapers were censored or shut down, and journalists practiced self-censorship to avoid detention. Critical reporting, especially on corruption or government failures, became impossible. Prominent journalists, such as Dele Giwa and others working with investigative newspapers, faced intimidation.

 Broader Consequence: This decree established a precedent for military-era control of the press in Nigeria, creating a climate of fear where media independence was severely restricted (Okunna, 2002).

 

2. Shutdown of The News and Tempo (1993): 

During the military regime of General Sani Abacha (1993–1998), Nigeria experienced some of the harshest suppression of press freedom in its history. Two critical newspapers, The News and Tempo, became primary targets because of their investigative reporting on government corruption and human rights abuses.

• Events Leading to Shutdown: The News had exposed financial misappropriation and highlighted human rights violations under Abacha’s government. The regime perceived such reporting as a threat to its authority. On 2 September 1993, the military government ordered the immediate closure of both newspapers.

• Arrests and Detentions: Editors and journalists were detained without trial. For example, Babafemi Ojudu, then editor of The News, and other staff were held under harsh conditions. Many journalists were interrogated by the State Security Service (SSS) and faced the constant threat of imprisonment.

• National and International Reaction: These actions drew condemnation from international press freedom organisations, including the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ). Despite this, the regime continued to harass journalists, limit foreign media reporting, and implement strict censorship rules.

• Impact: The shutdown silenced two of Nigeria’s most influential investigative media outlets and created a chilling effect on the broader press community. Journalists learned to avoid criticism of the regime to protect themselves, undermining accountability and transparency (Osaghae, 2010).

 Under General Sani Abacha’s regime, critical publications were closed, editors were arrested, and journalists were detained for reporting on government corruption, illustrating extreme suppression of dissenting voices.

  

3. Arrest of Sahara Reporters correspondents (2016): 

Even in Nigeria’s democratic era, press oppression persisted. Sahara Reporters, an investigative online news platform, has often reported on corruption, human rights abuses, and political misconduct. 

Journalists were detained under allegations of publishing “false news” and for exposing corruption scandals, highlighting ongoing harassment of investigative media in Nigeria.

• Events: In 2016, several correspondents were arrested for allegedly publishing “false news” related to high-profile corruption scandals involving government officials. The arrests were justified under the Nigeria Criminal Code and cybercrime provisions, which were increasingly used to restrict critical reporting.

• Details of Detention: Journalists were held for several days without formal charges, interrogated about their sources, and faced intimidation. In some instances, government officials publicly condemned the platform for allegedly undermining national interest, creating a perception of official harassment.

• Broader Implications: This case highlighted how digital and online media, which have greater reach and influence, remain vulnerable to political pressures. It also showed that press oppression in Nigeria has evolved from overt military censorship to legal and administrative intimidation in a supposedly democratic framework (Okunna, 2002; Osaghae, 2010).

These cases demonstrate that although Nigeria’s constitution guarantees press freedom, political, legal, and social pressures continue to threaten media autonomy.

These three cases illustrate that press freedom in Nigeria has consistently faced significant threats, ranging from military censorship to modern-day legal harassment. While constitutional guarantees exist, enforcement remains inconsistent, and journalists continue to operate under the threat of intimidation, detention, or shutdown when exposing corruption, human rights abuses, or government failures.

References

McQuail, D. (2010). McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory (6th ed.). Sage Publications.

Siebert, F., Peterson, T., & Schramm, W. (1956). Four Theories of the Press: The Authoritarian, Libertarian, Social Responsibility, and Soviet Communist Concepts of What the Press Should Be. University of Illinois Press.

Okunna, C. S. (2002). Ethics of Mass Media in Nigeria. Malthouse Press.

Osaghae, E. E. (2010). Media and Democracy in Nigeria: Challenges of Freedom and Regulation. African Journal of Political Science, 15(2), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajps.v15i2.67541