Headline

Trust TV: SERAP Drags Buhari To Court Over N5m Fine

Published

3 years ago

August 7, 2022

The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project and Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development have filed a lawsuit against the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), asking the court to “declare arbitrary and illegal, the N5 million imposed on Trust Television, Multichoice Nigeria Limited, Nigerian Television Authority-Startimes Limited and others over their documentaries on terrorism in the country.”

Joined in the suit as Defendants are the Minister of Information and Culture, Mr Lai Mohammed, and the National Broadcasting Commission.

The NBC had last week imposed the fines on the media houses, claiming that their documentaries “glorified the activities of bandits and undermines national security in Nigeria,” and contravene the provisions of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code.

The PUNCH reports that Trust TV was fined over the broadcast of the documentary titled “Nigeria’s Banditry: The Inside Story”, which was aired by the station on March 5, 2022.

The Trust TV management, in a statement last Wednesday, noted that the fine was communicated to the media firm in a letter signed by the NBC Director General, Balarabe Shehu Illela.

Illela had said the fine was imposed on Trust TV because its broadcast of the said documentary contravened sections of the National Broadcasting Code.

But in the suit number FHC/L/CS/1486/2022 filed last Friday at the Federal High Court, Lagos, SERAP, and the CJID are seeking: “an order setting aside the arbitrary and illegal fines of N5 million and any other penal sanction unilaterally imposed by the NBC on these media houses simply for carrying out their constitutional duties.”

According to the plaintiffs: “The NBC and Mohammed have not shown that the documentaries by the media houses would impose a specific risk of harm to a legitimate state interest that outweighs the public interest in the information provided by the documentaries.”

The plaintiffs said: “The documentaries by these independent media houses pose no risk to any definite interest in national security or public order.”

The plaintiffs also said, “It is inconsistent and incompatible with the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] to invoke the grounds of ‘glorifying terrorism and banditry’ as justifications for suppressing access to information of legitimate public interest that does not harm national security.”

The plaintiffs also said, “The documentaries by the independent media houses are in the public interest, and punishing the media houses simply for raising public awareness about these issues would have a disproportionate and chilling effect on their work, and on the work of other journalists and Nigerians.”

According to the plaintiffs, the action by the NBC and Mohammed is arbitrary, illegal, and unconstitutional, as it is contrary to section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, and international human rights treaties including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, which Nigeria has ratified.

The suit filed on behalf of the plaintiffs by their lawyers Kolawole Oluwadare and Ms Adelanke Aremo, read in part: “A fine is a criminal sanction and only the court is empowered by the Constitution to impose it. Fine imposed by regulatory agencies like the NBC without recourse to the courts is unfair, illegal, and unconstitutional.”

“The grounds of ‘glorifying terrorism and banditry’ used as the bases for sanctioning the media houses are entirely contrary to constitutional and international standards on freedom of expression and access to information.”

“Imposing any fine whatsoever without due process of law is arbitrary, as it contravenes the principles of nemo judex in causa sua which literally means one cannot be a judge in his own cause and audi alteram partem which means no one should be condemned unheard.”

“Article 19 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights establishes the right to freedom of opinion without interference. Article 19(2) establishes Nigeria’s obligations to respect ‘the right to freedom of expression,’ which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information, regardless of frontiers.”

“Under article 19 (3), restrictions on the right to freedom of expression must be ‘provided by law’, and necessary ‘for respect of the rights or reputations of others’ or ‘for the protection of national security or of public order, or of public health and morals.”

“Although article 19(3) recognises ‘national security’ as a legitimate aim, the Human Rights Council, the body charged with monitoring implementation of the Covenant, has stressed ‘the need to ensure that the invocation of national security is not used unjustifiably or arbitrarily to restrict the right to freedom of opinion and expression.’”

“The grounds for imposing fines on these independent media houses fail to meet the requirements of legality, necessity, and proportionality.”

“The requirement of necessity also implies an assessment of the proportionality of the grounds, with the aim of ensuring that the excuse of ‘glorifying terrorism and banditry’ and ‘national security’ are not used as a pretext to unduly intrude upon the rights to freedom of expression and access to information.”

No date has been fixed for the hearing of the suit.

Headline

Coup: Guinea-Bissau Junta Releases Six Held Opposition Politicians

Published

1 day ago

December 24, 2025

Editor

Guinea-Bissau’s ruling junta on Tuesday released six members of the political opposition who had been detained since a coup last month.

The six freed opposition members are said to be close associates of Domingos Simoes Pereira, head of the PAIGC party that led the country to independence in 1974.

Pereira has been in custody since the coup.

In a statement by the High Military Command, the junta’s governing body, the releases are described as a sign of good faith and a step towards the return to constitutional normality and respect for international rights.

The army seized power on 26 November after ousting outgoing President Umaro Sissoco Embalo in the wake of a presidential vote.

After taking over, the military suspended the electoral process and announced it would take control of the West African country for a period of one year.

Recall that another opposition candidate, Fernando Dias, took refuge in Nigeria’s embassy, which granted him asylum, while Embalo fled the country after being briefly detained by the military at the time of the coup.

Meanwhile, Senegal’s Foreign Minister, Cheikh Niang, led a delegation to Guinea-Bissau, where he met with detained opponents and requested their release.

Headline

7 Territories Still Under Colonial Rule

Published

1 day ago

December 24, 2025

Editor

Even though most nations became independent in the last century, some territories are still ruled by other nations.

Contents
1. Western Sahara
2. Guam
3. American Samoa
4. United States Virgin Islands
5. Falkland Islands / Malvinas
6. Gibraltar
7. Bermuda

Many of them remain on the United Nations list of non-self-governing territories, meaning they have not completed the process of decolonization. These places usually depend on bigger countries for laws, passports, defence, or political control.

In this article, Nigerian Tribune highlights 7 territories still under colonial rule:

1. Western Sahara

Western Sahara remains one of the world’s biggest unresolved colonial issues. Morocco controls most of the territory, but the Polisario Front wants independence for the Sahrawi people. The UN is still trying to help both sides agree on a peaceful solution.

2. Guam

Guam is an important US territory in the Pacific, used heavily for American military operations. The US oversees its defence and foreign relations.

People living there are US citizens, but they cannot vote in presidential elections and do not have full representation in Congress.

3. American Samoa

American Samoa has more local control than Guam, but the United States still decides immigration, defence, and foreign affairs.

Residents are considered US nationals and must apply if they want full citizenship.

4. United States Virgin Islands

The US Virgin Islands have their own legislature, but the United States makes major constitutional and political decisions. The territory depends heavily on US federal support.

5. Falkland Islands / Malvinas

The Falkland Islands remain controlled by the United Kingdom (UK), but Argentina has long disputed this claim, having been in control of the Islands for a few years before 1833.

The people living there voted strongly to stay British, yet the sovereignty dispute continues to appear in the UN.

6. Gibraltar

Gibraltar sits at the Southern tip of Spain. The United Kingdom controls it, but Spain insists the territory belongs to them.

Gibraltarians have repeatedly voted in favour of remaining British, but the dispute is still discussed within the UN Decolonisation Committee.

7. Bermuda

Bermuda is a British Overseas Territory situated in the North Atlantic Ocean. Although it manages most of its own internal affairs and enjoys a strong economy with modern facilities, the United Kingdom still handles its defence and represents it in global matters.

Headline

Russia-Ukraine War: Pope Leo Calls For Global Christmas Truce

Published

1 day ago

December 24, 2025

Editor

Pope Leo XIV on Tuesday renewed his call for a global truce on Christmas Day, saying he felt “great sadness” after Russia “apparently rejected a request” for a pause in fighting.

Speaking to reporters at his residence in Castel Gandolfo near Rome, the Pope urged all sides involved in conflict to observe at least one day of peace.

“I am renewing my request to all people of goodwill to respect a day of peace — at least on the feast of the birth of our Saviour,” Leo said.

Recall that Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 and has repeatedly turned down calls for a ceasefire, arguing that any pause would give Ukraine a military advantage.

“Among the things that cause me great sadness is the fact that Russia has apparently rejected a request for a truce,” the pope said.

Referring to conflicts worldwide, Leo added, “I hope they will listen and there will be 24 hours of peace in the whole world.”

The appeal came as fighting continued in eastern Ukraine. On Tuesday, Ukrainian forces withdrew from a town after heavy battles with Russian troops. Russian strikes killed three civilians and left thousands without power during winter temperatures.

There was no indication of progress toward ending the war after separate meetings last weekend in Miami between the United States officials and negotiators from Russia and Ukraine. The conflict is nearing four years with no settlement in sight.

Earlier this month, Pope Leo met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. When asked whether he would accept Zelensky’s invitation to visit Ukraine, the pope said, “I hope so,” while noting that it was not possible to say when such a visit could happen.

Leo also warned that efforts to secure peace without European diplomatic involvement were “unrealistic”, expressing optimism that President Donald Trump’s proposed peace plan could bring a “huge change” to the transatlantic alliance.