CPJ condemns trial, conviction of Nigerian journalists for alleged defamation

The Committee to Defend Journalists, a non-profit organisation that focuses on selling press freedom worldwide, has condemned the trial and conviction of two Nigerian journalists for defamation.

In an announcement dated 14 April, the CPJ mentioned the 2 Nigerian journalists – Gidado Shuaib and Alfred Olufemi – “ought to by no means have been charged, not to mention convicted, for publishing an investigative report a couple of manufacturing facility.”

It mentioned their conviction “sends a chilling message to the Nigerian press and highlights the pressing want for authorities to reform the nation’s legal guidelines and guarantee journalism shouldn’t be criminalised.”

A Justice of the Peace’s court docket in Ilorin, Kwara State, on 7 February, convicted the journalists for publishing a defamatory article towards Hillcrest Agro-Allied Industries Restricted.

Within the contested publication printed by a web based platform, Information Digest, the article mentioned Hillcrest Agro-Allied Industries Restricted, a agency positioned at Kilometre 4, Ajase-Ipo alongside Offa Street, Amberi Village, Kwara State, allowed its employees members to smoke Indian hemp freely.

A.S Muhammad, the trial Justice of the Peace, mentioned within the verdict that “the defendants had a standard intention in publishing” the damaging article “and should have meant the pure penalties.”

Mr Muhammad additional dominated that “the weather of defamation have been established by the prosecution.”

The Justice of the Peace sentenced the journalists to 2 months imprisonment with an possibility of N40,000 effective on one of many two counts most popular towards them – the offence of conspiracy.

He sentenced every of them to a effective of N60,000 on the rely of defamation or three months imprisonment in default of fee.

The Justice of the Peace clarified that “every of the convicts is to pay a effective of N100,000 just for the offences of conspiracy and defamation respectively, having been convicted.”

The journalists have since paid the effective.

CPJ condemned the court docket determination following the PREMIUM TIMES publication earlier in April.

Angela Quintal, CPJ’s Africa program coordinator, from New York, quoted within the organisation’s assertion additionally condemned the strategy of bringing the journalists to custody.

The CPJ recalled that earlier than the fees had been filed, police leveraged their entry to name knowledge and briefly detained a Information Digest internet developer and no less than two different journalists of their efforts to find the journalists.

“The telecom surveillance used to deliver the journalists into custody, adopted by a greater than three-year-long trial, demonstrates the lengths Nigerian authorities will go to arrest and prosecute the press,” Ms Quintal mentioned.

CPJ famous two ongoing fits instituted towards the Nigerian Communications Fee in 2017 and 2018 “over laws granting warrantless entry to telecom subscribers’ info”.

Journalists fault court docket determination

In the meantime, the journalists have faulted the court docket determination and vowed to enchantment towards the judgement to have it overturned.

Their lawyer, Ibraheem Gambari, in an announcement shared with PREMIUM TIMES, expressed his shoppers’ “confidence within the advantage of the enchantment.”

The defence lawyer identified that the judgement was erroneously based mostly on “the police (a report that) had already discovered them (the 2 journalists) culpable lengthy earlier than they had been invited to state their very own facet of the story.”

Opposite to the court docket’s findings, Mr Gambari argued {that a} former worker of Hillcrest Agro-Allied Industries Restricted, “testified earlier than the court docket that he was not solely a witness to how smoking of Indian hemp pervaded the positioning however equally, it was the persistent smoking of the Indian hemp that knowledgeable his determination to sever his employment with the corporate.”

“We strongly consider that justice will probably be achieved at enchantment in order that patriotic youthful parts within the society like our shoppers won’t be discouraged from embarking on their respective altruistic endeavours,” Mr Gambari mentioned.

A former employee on the firm, Adepoju Adedotun, testified in defence of the defendants, confirming that many labourers often took Indian hemp on web site to have the ability to do the strenuous work they had been engaged for.

Mr Adedotun, who mentioned he was engaged as an informal employee, instructed the court docket that he needed to stop the job as a result of he couldn’t smoke Indian hemp which he mentioned the job required. He mentioned he additionally left the corporate as a result of he needed to pursue his tutorial aspirations.

Throughout cross-examination by the prosecution, he confirmed that he didn’t report the smoking of Indian hemp on the firm to any legislation enforcement company.

The Justice of the Peace rejected his testimony and selected to consider the police which claimed it investigated and discovered that Indian hemp smoking by no means passed off on the firm.

ALSO READ: Defamation: Journalists to problem conviction by Kwara Justice of the Peace, give causes

Reacting to the judgement, Mr Olufemi equally expressed bewilderment that the Justice of the Peace ignored very important proof that exonerated him and his colleague.

He lamented that the end result of the trial was miserable, owing to the overwhelming proof by a former worker of Hillcrest “who boldly testified towards the corporate earlier than the court docket. It takes braveness to come back ahead to do this.”

Mr Olufemi, a a number of award-winning journalist, expressed considerations over the implication of the judgement on press freedom in Nigeria.

He mentioned the choice would undermine accountability journalism in Nigeria, including that it could embolden highly effective folks in public establishments in addition to huge companies to interrupt the legislation.

Background

Within the publication complained about by the corporate, Mr Olufemi wrote that Hillcrest manufacturing facility, a rice milling firm, was “allowing its staff to smoke Indian hemp and tobacco on responsibility.”

The corporate mentioned a key consequence of the defamatory article got here when a United Arab Emirates (UAE)-based firm, Aras Group LLC, withdrew a mortgage facility it was about to situation to Hillcrest Agro-Allied Industries Restricted.

The prosecution’s first witness had instructed the court docket that the Aras Group LLC drew Hillcrest’s consideration to the damaging article, saying “they’d not cope with (a) firm that’s concerned in illicit medicine actions.”

It was the lack of the mortgage facility from the Aras Group that triggered the defamation swimsuit towards the journalists.

The Hillcrest administration filed a petition on the Kwara State Police Command, demanding an investigation into the allegations.

On 12 November 2019, Messrs Shuaib and Olufemi had been arraigned on expenses of conspiracy and defamation. The offences, the prosecution mentioned, breached sections 97 and 392 of the Penal Code Legislation.

In proving its case, the prosecution referred to as three witnesses and tendered eight reveals.

On the shut of the prosecution’s case, on 5 April 2022, the defendants filed a no-case submission, urging the court docket to dismiss the case towards them on the grounds that the prosecution failed to steer any incriminating proof towards them.

In its ruling, nevertheless, the court docket dismissed the defendants’ no-case submission, affirming that the prosecution had established a prima facie case towards them.

The court docket then ordered the defendants to enter their defence.

Defence

The defendants collectively referred to as just one witness, Adepoju Adedotun, and tendered six reveals in a bid to extricate themselves from the case.

The 2 journalists insisted of their separate written statements to the police that their report was balanced and truthful. They pleaded justification by insisting that their article was considerably true, and certified privilege in that their reportage was achieved within the public curiosity.

Mr Olufemi mentioned he labored as an undercover labourer on the manufacturing facility for 4 days when he confirmed that “informal staff aren’t stopped from smoking Indian hemp”. To realize a balanced reportage, Mr Olufemi mentioned he referred to as the corporate’s hotline and a masculine voice confirmed the allegation when “confronted” with info.

In arguing their case of their ultimate written tackle, their lawyer argued that the Nigerian Supreme Courtroom had “decriminalised” defamation.

They submitted two points of their ultimate written tackle earlier than the court docket. The 2 points had been whether or not the prosecution had confirmed the offences as charged towards the defendants and whether or not the defendants weren’t lined by the defence of justification and privilege.

Citing part 39 of the structure, the defendants contended that the criminalisation of defamation was improper and antithetical to the constitutionally assured rights of freedom of expression.

However the Justice of the Peace, in his verdict, held that the defendants’ arguments had been “clear makes an attempt to distort or arm-twist the info and choices of the Supreme Courtroom.”

He additionally rejected the journalists’ defence of justification and certified privilege.