The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) is appalled at the verbal attacks on Luv FM’s Erastus Asare Donkor by the Member of Parliament for Assin Central, Kennedy Agyapong, and his call for the journalist to be beaten.
We find the MP’s comments inflammatory and reckless, liable to put the life of the reporter of the Kumasi-based radio station in danger. It is therefore a frontal attack on press freedom.
The Journalist had reported on the killing of the critical social media activist Mohammed Ibrahim Anyass, popularly called Kaaka, at Ejura in the Ashanti Region of Ghana and a subsequent protest by the youth of the town in which two people were shot dead by security forces. The reporter was later invited by a Committee set up by the government to probe the incidents.
Commenting on Asare Donkor’s reports and subsequent submissions before the Committee, the Member of Parliament, who also chairs the Parliamentary Select-Committee on Defense and Interior, subjected the journalist to vitriolic abuse and called for him to be beaten.
“That boy should be beaten seriously. He is so annoying. For the foolish submissions he made before the Committee, we have to beat the hell out of him. If I were the President, I would have ordered this boy to be whipped”, the lawmaker said in an interview on July 9, 2021, on Net2 TV, which he owns. The MP also attacked Joy FM, the sister station of Luv FM and the Ghanaian media in general.
The journalist has told the MFWA that following Kennedy Agyapong’s attack on him and the call for him to be beaten, he does not feel safe. He said he has been asked by the Management of the Multimedia Group Limited (MGL), operators of Luv FM, to stay off work and keep a low profile. The Management of the MGL has meanwhile lodged a formal complaint with Ashanti Regional Police Command over the threats against their reporter.
“Sir, you may recall that some time in the recent past, Honourable Agyapong issued similar threats against Ahmed Hussein-Suale, who at the time had undertaken some journalistic works; Ahmed Hussein-Suale was later horribly killed,” the MGL said in their letter to the police which copied several important institutions including Parliament, the Presidency and the Manhyia Palace.
The MFWA is deeply concerned about the MP’s hostility towards Erastus Asare Donkor and his open call for the journalist to be beaten. This concern is born out of Kennedy Agyapong’s previous attacks on Ahmed Suale before the investigative journalist was murdered in Accra on January 16, 2019. The MP had published a picture of the undercover journalist and urged his supporters to attack him wherever they found him.
Against this background, we find Kennedy Agyapong’s attack on Erastus Asare Donkor reckless and highly disappointing, especially from an MP and at this time when the country is still mourning the killing of Ibrahim Mohammed Kaaka and the two protesters.
Security officers have been involved in too many operations involving civilians that have been fraught with several security breaches and ended in mayhem, thus threatening to undermine public confidence in the security service. As the Chair of the Parliamentary Select-Committee on Defense and Interior, we expected Kennedy Agyapong to show some concern about this sad trend. We, therefore, find it scandalous that he has chosen to make the media the target of his undignified tantrums.
The work of the three-month Committee sitting at Ejura is, among others, to find out the perpetrators of the killing. It is therefore unfortunate, hasty and prejudicial for Kennedy Agyapong to accuse Erastus Asare Donkor in particular of causing the deaths.
The MFWA condemns the attack on the journalist and the attempt to incite the public against him. We call on the Police to take note of the dangerous pronouncements and the threat that it portends for the journalist’s life. We urge the government to call Kennedy Agyapong to order and to take steps to offer Erastus Asare Donkor the needed protection.
We also commend the management of MGL for bringing the matter to the attention of the police and other relevant institutions.
The last six years have been extremely repressive for the media in Nigeria as impunity reached a new high under President Muhammadu Buhari. About 300 press freedom violations including the unresolved killings of seven journalists were recorded over the period, according to a report launched in Abuja on June 30, 2021.
Titled “The State of Media Freedom in Nigeria”, the report focused primarily on the six years of President Buhari’s government and detailed violations ranging from murder to torture, arrest and detentions, sentencing, physical assaults, threats against journalists as well as arbitrary shutdown/suspension of media organisations.
The report was produced by the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) in collaboration with the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), with funding support from OSIWA. The launching ceremony, which was supported by the Hewlett Foundation, was held at the Secretariat of the NUJ in Abuja with other participants joining remotely.
The violations affected over 500 media organisations and media professionals according to the report which also named members of the defence and security services, politicians, political party thugs and the regulatory authorities among the biggest violators of press freedom in Nigeria.
“The lack of transparency, corruption and politics of exclusion often result in frustrations and violent rivalries, creating dangerous environments in which journalists become easy targets for powerful forces intent on suppressing dissent and evading public accountability,” Christopher Isiguzo, President of the NUJ, observed in his address.
“The increasing rate of violations of media professionals and members of their families is a clear signal that journalists are now being deliberately targeted as a result of the work they do,” Mr Isiguzo added.
The Programme Manager for Freedom of Expression at the MFWA, Muheeb Saeed, who joined the forum via Zoom, said stakeholders in the media sector needed to continue to work together to find ways of countering the increasing hostility against journalists in Nigeria and the sub-region.
“One of these ways is the documentation of violations against press freedom to serve as reference material for advocacy which is what the MFWA and NUJ have done in producing the report on the State of Press Freedom in Nigeria,” he said.
The killing of two protesters in Ejura in the Ashanti Region of Ghana marks a new low in Ghana’s descent into lawlessness, and the Media Foundation for West Africa MFWA condemns it in the strongest terms.
The killings occurred on June 29, 2021, following clashes between joint police and military team and a crowd of irate protesters. The protests erupted shortly after the burial of Ibrahim Anyass Muhammed, alias Kaaka, a popular social activist who died from his injuries on June 28 after being attacked by some thugs.
The joint police and military team had been deployed to the town in anticipation of troubles, clashed with the protesters, leading to the death of two and injury to at least ten others. This comes on the heels of the 2020 general elections which recorded at least five deaths and several other incidents in perhaps the most violent elections under the Fourth Republic. Ahead of the general elections, the country had witnessed some serious security breaches during the Ayawaso West Wuogon Parliamentary by-election of 2019 which was marred by violence with National Security Operatives in the thick of affairs.
The MFWA finds it scandalous that the authorities deployed armed security personnel to confront distraught members of a community that has suffered a painful bereavement rather than proactively send emissaries to liaise with the chiefs, youth leaders and elders to calm tempers.
We are concerned about the increasing number of botched security operations that have resulted in flagrant abuses of human rights. The attack on the protesters went well beyond the pale of reasonable force, and violates the UN-sanctioned Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, which states, among others, that;
Governments and law enforcement agencies should develop a range of means as broad as possible and equip law enforcement officials with various types of weapons and ammunition that would allow for a differentiated use of force and firearms. These should include the development of non-lethal incapacitating weapons for use in appropriate situations, with a view to increasingly restraining the application of means capable of causing death or injury to persons. For the same purpose, it should also be possible for law enforcement officials to be equipped with self-defensive equipment such as shields, helmets, bullet-proof vests and bullet-proof means of transportation, in order to decrease the need to use weapons of any kind.
The development and deployment of non-lethal incapacitating weapons should be carefully evaluated in order to minimize the risk of endangering uninvolved persons, and the use of such weapons should be carefully controlled.
Law enforcement officials, in carrying out their duty, shall, as far as possible, apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms. They may use force and firearms only if other means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the intended result.
The above-mentioned Principles also urges governments to “ensure that arbitrary or abusive use of force and firearms by law enforcement officials is punished as a criminal offence.”
In view of the above, we welcome the call by President Akufo-Addo for a public inquiry into the deadly crackdown on protesters at Ejura. While the call is in order, the outcome of the inquiry is more critical. There have been many such inquiries in the past whose outcomes have produced nothing concrete. These include the Emile Short inquiry into the Ayawaso West Wuogon by-election incidents. Ghanaians demand and deserve a credible probe leading to retribution for the perpetrators of the Ejura violence and killing.
The Media Foundation for West Africa is outraged and dismayed by the fatal attack on Ibrahim Anyass Muhammed, aka Kaaka, a social activist at Ejura in the Ashanti region of Ghana, and urges the Police to do everything possible to ensure that the culprits face the law.
The Activist’s killing can send a chilling signal to other outspoken citizens and create an atmosphere of fear and insecurity among the pressure groups community.
Muhammed, also known as Kaaka, was reported to be returning home at about 1:30 am on Sunday when his assailants who appear to have been on his trail, accosted him in front of his home. The hoodlums bludgeoned Kaaka into a stupor and the activist died at the Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital in the regional Capital Kumasi on June 28, 2021, where he had been referred from the Ejura Government Hospital.
Ibrahim Muhammed, 45, is a member of the Economic Fighters League, a socio-political pressure group, and was known to be vocal on local and national development and governance. He was also very active on social media, particularly Facebook and an activist of the #FixTheCountry movement, an ongoing online protest demanding better living conditions and public service in Ghana.
His last activity on Facebook was a post criticising the arrest of members of the #TheFixCountry movement at the Accra High Court Complex on June 25, 2021.
The Economic Fighters League has condemned the killing of their comrade saying that he was martyred for demanding better for his community.
The statement issued on June 28, 2021, said “Kaaka was an active and concerned activist using social media to expose the developmental problems of his community.” The statement indicated that the deceased activist had received several threats over his activities including a threat from the police to charge him with disturbing public peace. The MFWA has sighted a copy of the police letter dated June 11, 2021.
The MFWA welcomes the announcement by Godwin Ahianyo, the Ashanti Regional Police spokesperson, that two suspects have been arrested in connection with Muhammed Kaaka’s murder.
The widespread belief that the activist was attacked for his outspoken demand for accountability and better social services can dissuade other critical voices and discourage participation in discourse on development issues in Ejura and Ghana as a whole.
The incident can reinforce the growing sentiment among Ghanaians that the authorities are imposing a “culture of silence’ by their hostility to critics and intolerance of criticism.
We, therefore, commend the Police for the swift arrests and urge them to pursue the matter to its logical conclusion.
The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) welcomes the ruling by the ECOWAS Court of Justice in Abuja on June 22, 2021, in which it “restrained the government of President Muhammadu Buhari and its agents from unlawfully imposing sanctions or doing anything whatsoever to harass, intimidate, arrest or prosecute Twitter and/or any other social media service provider(s), media houses, radio and television broadcast stations, the Plaintiffs and other Nigerians who are Twitter users, pending the hearing and determination of this suit.”
The ruling followed a suit filed against the government by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and 176 concerned Nigerians arguing that “the unlawful suspension of Twitter in Nigeria, criminalization of Nigerians and other people using Twitter have escalated repression of human rights and unlawfully restricted the rights of Nigerians and other people to freedom of expression, access to information, and media freedom in the country.”
SERAP is a non-profit, non-partisan, legal and advocacy organisation devoted to promoting transparency, accountability and respect for socio-economic rights in Nigeria. The plaintiffs had sought an order of interim injunction restraining the Federal Government from implementing its suspension of Twitter in Nigeria and proceeding with its threat to prosecute those who breach the ban, including media organisations.
On June 4, 2021, Nigeria’s information and culture minister, Mr Lai Mohammed, announced the ban on Twitter in the country after the social media platform deleted a tweet by President Muhammadu Buhari for violating the company’s policies.
Nigerian Twitter users took to Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to bypass the censorship. However, the country’s Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, ordered the “immediate prosecution” of those breaching the ban, and directed government agencies to cooperate with prosecutors “to ensure the speedy prosecution of offenders.” The National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) also ordered TV and radio stations to “suspend the patronage of Twitter immediately.”
“The court has listened very well to the objection by Nigeria. The court has this to say. Any interference with Twitter is viewed as inference with human rights, and that will violate human rights. Therefore, this court has jurisdiction to hear the case. The court also hereby orders that the application be heard expeditiously. The Nigerian government must take immediate steps to implement the order,” the court explained.
It said the criminalisation of people using Twitter had escalated the repression of human rights and unlawfully restricted freedom of expression, access to information and media freedom in the country.
The Court of Justice is composed of independent judges appointed by the authority of heads of state of government from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) member states.
The court issued the verdict after hearing arguments from Solicitor to SERAP, Femi Falana SAN, who is also a Board member of MFWA and Maimuna Shiru, counsel for the government.
“The intervention of the ECOWAS Court is a timely relief for millions of Nigerians using Twitter who have been threatened with prosecution under the provision of the Penal Code relating to sedition,” Falana said in reaction to the verdict.
The plaintiffs had averred that the suspension and threat of prosecution by the Federal Government is arbitrary and constitute a fundamental breach of the country’s international human rights obligations including under Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and Article 19 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Nigeria is a state party. The substantive suit has been adjourned to 6th July 2021.
The MFWA is also glad to learn that four journalists and five non-governmental organisations in Nigeria have also filed a suit against the Federal Government at the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice in Abuja challenging the suspension of Twitter in Nigeria as a violation of their human rights under international law.
The suit, lodged with number ECW/CCJ/APP/29/21 ECW/CCJ/APP/29/21, was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs by Abuja-based human rights and free expression lawyer, Mrs Mojirayo Ogunlana Nkanga, under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Revised ECOWAS Treaty, and the Nigerian Constitution, among others.
The plaintiffs claim that Nigeria’s ongoing Twitter ban violates their right to freedom of expression and interferes with the ability of the journalists to do their work.
The MFWA welcomes the verdict of the ECOWAS Court and commends the efforts of the media and civil society in Nigeria in challenging the repressive and retrogressive Twitter ban in that country. We urge the government to comply with the court’s ruling and refrain from prosecuting violators of the Twitter ban.
The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) is very concerned about the June 17, 2021 sentencing of journalist Madiambal Diagne to three months in prison for defamation.
The Manager of Le Quotidien newspaper, Madiambal Diagne, was sentenced by a Dakar court following a suit by magistrate Souleymane Teliko, also President of the Union of magistrates of Senegal (UMS). The media manager was sentenced to six months in prison with three months suspended, and a fine of 500,000 CFA francs and 5 million CFA francs (US$9000) as damages to be paid to judge Teliko.
The case dates back to March 29, 2020, during an RFM radio broadcast hosted by journalist Babacar Fall. In his submission, Madiambal Diagne accused Judge Teliko of having unduly claimed travel expenses in connection with the trial of Hissène Habré. To defend his honor, the President of the Senegalese Magistrates Union dragged the journalist to court.
For his part, journalist Madiambal Diagne believes that “this decision is unjust” and that he intends to appeal, since he says: “it is a decision taken on the basis of extrajudicial considerations.” He told the press that he had produced “all the evidence supporting [his] assertions in court.”
The Francophone Press Union (UPF) of which Diagne is the President, in a press release, supported their colleague. “UPF supports its international President who has done nothing but freely exercised his profession as a journalist,” said the Union in the press release.
The UFP also indicated that the defendant provided proof of his claims during his trial. “Despite this, he has been handed this heavy sentence, which looks like a corporate decision, at first instance,” the group protested.
MFWA is concerned about Diagne’s conviction and welcomes the journalist’s decision to appeal the sentence. The trend across the free world is towards the decriminalisation of press offenses, particularly libel against public officials. Without wanting to comment on the merits of the case, we consider it backward that in a democratic country, a journalist has been subjected to criminal prosecution and custodial sentence for defamation in the line of duty.
We, therefore, call on the Senegalese authorities to act to ensure the release of Diagne and to begin the process of modifying the media legal framework in order to decriminalise press offenses.
The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) has received with disappointment the ruling on June 17, 2021 by the Human Rights Division of the Accra High Court on its request to Ghana’s National Communications Authority (NCA) for information on the closure of some broadcast stations.
Background
In exercising our right under the Right to Information (RTI) Law and Article 21 (f) of the 1992 Constitution, the MFWA sued the regulator late last year after it demanded GHC2,000 in order to grant the request for information on the radio stations it shut down.
The NCA had indicated that the FM stations it shut down, including notable ones sympathetic to the main opposition National Democratic Party (NDC), had not renewed their authorisation license. MFWA noticed from the NCA’s “List of Authorised VHF-FM Radio Stations in Ghana as at Second Quarter 2020” that some radio stations whose last authorisation renewal suggested that they had defaulted were still operating while others were shut down. This information was on the website of the NCA as required by law.
When the MFWA made calls to the NCA to find out, the NCA official promised to get back to the organisation with a response. That response did not come. The NCA, however, pulled down the information on its website and deleted two columns—date of first authorisation and date of last authorisation renewal—before uploading the information again on its website.
We asked for the reason for the deletion of the two columns from the report it had previously published.
Ruling
The Court granted our requests 1, 2 and 4 relating to the list of all radio stations that had been shut down by the NCA, a list of all authorised TV stations, a list of all authorised VHF-FM radio stations, and the respective dates of first authorisation and last authorisation renewal. The presiding judge, Justice Gifty Agyei Addo, however, declined the request for the regulator to explain certain changes it had made to a report on its website.
The MFWA is disappointed at the ruling for a number of reasons:
1. The Court asked that the MFWA pays a fee of GHC1,500 to the NCA in order to have our request granted. The bone of contention was the GHC2000 the NCA demanded in order to furnish the MFWA with the information we had requested under the RTI law. We find it curious that the judge ordered us to pay GHC1,500 for the information, despite stating that the NCA had misconceived the provisions on fees and charges under the Electronic Communications Act (Act 775). We find the amount to be exorbitant, given that section 23(3)(d) of the RTI Act provides that “Where the Information Officer decides to give access; the notice shall state the prescribed fee for the REPRODUCTION of information.” (Emphasis supplied).
2. The NCA already has the information we requested—the information based on which it proceeded to shut down radio stations—and does not have to conduct any kind of research to put it together as the authority is claiming. Even if the NCA had to conduct a fresh search in order to compile the information, the law provides for payment for the reproduction of the information such as printing, photocopying etc. and not the time used by the public official to put the information together.
3. The fee of GHC2,000 demanded by the NCA was a ploy to dissuade us from pursuing the information we were seeking. The MFWA did not go to court because it could not pay. While we can pay the GHC1,500 fees decided by the court, it is important to underline the fact that the right to access public information under the RTI law accrues to all Ghanaians including the lowest income earners. This precedent, can therefore, discourage or disenable a certain class of Ghanaians from exercising this.
4. The court also dismissed our request to the NCA to explain why it deleted two columns from its report before reposting on its website saying we were asking for an opinion, and not information. We find this unfortunate because request for information is not limited to data. The information could be an explanation for decisions taken by the public institutions on behalf of the people.
5. Another issue we find worrying about the judgment is the Court’s decision that the information we requested is not of public interest. The radio stations broadcast to the general public and their closure was of national interest. The Minister responded to the issue in parliament and it featured prominently during the sector minister’s vetting. It is therefore difficult to understand how the request could be said to be for the MFWA’s personal interest.
6. We wish to state that we went to court as a matter of principle. We sought to prevent a precedent that can encourage public institutions to dissuade RTI requests by demanding exorbitant fees from applicants, some of whom could be ordinary or even vulnerable citizens.
We will wait and study the judgement from the court together with our legal team to decide the next line of action and would inform the public accordingly.
The Media Foundation for West Africa condemns the ban on Twitter in Nigeria and calls on the country’s authorities to take steps to reverse the order that is denying an estimated 40 million Twitter users access to the microblogging and social networking site.
We are also concerned that Nigeria’s National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), the regulatory body of all broadcast stations, has asked all radio and TV stations to immediately deactivate their Twitter handles and desist from using the platform to gather or disseminate information.
On June 4, 2021, Nigeria’s information and culture minister, Mr Lai Mohammed, announced the Twitter ban in a statement, stating that the site’s activities are “capable of undermining Nigeria’s corporate existence.” Ironically, the Minister published the statement on Twitter ban on Twitter – and other mediums.
Twitter’s indefinite suspension came two days after the social media platform deleted a tweet by President Muhammadu Buhari for violating the company’s policies. Referring to current secessionist moves in the southeast region, Buhari, a Fulani man from the northeastern region, threatened to treat “those misbehaving today” in “the language they will understand.” The President’s tweet had referenced the 1967-70 Nigerian Civil War, during which more than 1 million people reportedly died when secessionists from the southeast region sought to create an independent Biafra nation for the Igbo ethnic people.
The tweet generated a huge backlash because of its genocidal tone, causing Twitter to delete it. The following day, information minister Mohammed described Twitter’s action as “insulting.”
On June 5, the Association of Licensed Telecommunications Operators confirmed that its members, mostly mobile internet service providers, had received directives from the Nigerian Communications Commission to restrict access to Twitter.
Netblocks, London-based internet monitor, reported on June 5 that network data showed that access to the Twitter platform and backend servers “is now restricted on leading networks MTN, Globacom, Airtel and 9mobile.”
Twitter has responded in a statement that it is “deeply concerned” by its blocking in Nigeria and stressed that “access to the free and #OpenInternet is an essential human right in modern society.”
“We will work to restore access for all those in Nigeria who rely on Twitter to communicate and connect with the world,” Twitter added, with the hashtag #KeepitOn”.
Despite the Twitter ban, Nigerian Twitter users have been undeterred, using Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to bypass government censorship and access the site. However, in a statement obtained by MFWA, Nigeria’s Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, ordered the “immediate prosecution” of those breaching the ban. Malami directed government agencies to cooperate with prosecutors “to ensure the speedy prosecution of offenders without any further delay.”
The MFWA finds this order contrary to the provisions of Nigeria’s 1999 constitution and is deeply concerned about the hardline stand of the government. Section 39 of Nigeria’s current 1999 constitution says “(1) every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.” Sub-section (2) of same Section 39 says “Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1) of this section, every person shall be entitled to own, establish and operate any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas and opinions.”
Criticisms trail ban
The Twitter ban in Africa’s most populous democratic country has generated a wave of criticisms and anger by the citizens, foreign bodies, and human rights organisations.
Human rights lawyer, and Board member of the MFWA, Femi Falana called the ban on Twitter a “provocative infringement.”
A joint statement from the diplomatic missions of the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Norway, Ireland, and the European Union said they were “disappointed” over the Twitter ban.
“We strongly support the fundamental human right of free expression and access to information as a pillar of democracy in Nigeria as around the world and these rights apply online as well as offline.”
Other notable bodies that have condemned the Twitter ban are the Newspaper Proprietors’ Association of Nigeria, Nigerian Guild of Editors, and the Nigeria Union of Journalists.
The government has in the meantime ordered that all over-the-top streaming services and social media operations in the country be licensed. Analysts fear that this is an indication that the government might want to restrict the use of other media and communications services like WhatsApp and Facebook that use data provided by internet service providers.
Many fear that President Buhari – who in 2015 prior to his election claimed to be a converted democrat – is planning another aggressive attack on free speech as he did in 1984 when he was the military head of state.
During his rule, Buhari promulgated a military decree that gave him power to shut down media houses and jail journalists for stories his regime considered unfavourable.
‘Hostile environment for press freedom’
Nigeria is ‘fast’ becoming a “hostile environment for press freedom,” Rights lawyer, Yakubu Bawa said. “It is as if we are in a police state; as if we are in a military regime. Even during military regimes, people challenged government through the mass media. This happening in a democratic dispensation is unacceptable,” Bawa, the Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association in Plateau State, said in an interview.
The National Broadcasting Commission, NBC, Nigeria’s broadcast licensing agency said in February 2019, that it sanctioned 78 broadcast stations between October and December 2017 for “breaching broadcasting codes”.
A local TV station, Channels Television last month received threats of sanctions for interviewing secessionist leaders. Many more stations could be sanctioned for breaching the order to stop using their Twitter accounts to disseminate information.
The Media Foundation for Africa is deeply worried by the Twitter ban in Nigeria, as this amounts to a clampdown on press freedom and freedom of speech, which are both guaranteed in sections 22 and 39 of the Nigerian constitution, respectively.
We also believe that the directive by the National Broadcasting Commission that all radio and TV stations desist from using Twitter is an infringement on their fundamental right.
We urge the government to reverse the Twitter ban for the citizens to continue to express their opinions which are guaranteed under the Nigerian constitution, as well as Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
We welcome the announcement on June 7, 2021, by the Nigerian Foreign Minister, Geoffrey Onyeama that the country was in talks with Twitter on the ban, and urge both sides to negotiate in good faith and with the best interest of Nigerian Twitter users as their priority.
Fifty violations were recorded in the first quarter of 2021 in the MFWA’s monitoring of the freedom of expression (FOE) environment of West Africa, with Nigeria (10) and Guinea Bissau (7) emerging as the two top violators. The last quarter of 2020 recorded two violations less.
While Nigeria has had a repressive FOE environment over the years, threats from drug cartels and military interventions in politics have effectively silenced critical voices in Guinea Bissau.
The quarter also saw Senegal, a bastion of democracy and respect for civil liberties, descend into a brief moment of despotism that resulted in five violations including the killing of two protesters amidst several arrests, an internet shutdown, and shutdowns of media organisations.
Two journalists and a number of political activists were imprisoned in a continuing crackdown on anti-government elements in Guinea. Like Guinea, Togo recorded five violations, all of them against journalists and media outlets. Read the full report here
Benin has been one of the stable democracies in the West Africa region noted for stellar records on freedom of expression, press freedom, and digital rights. However, in recent years, the country has witnessed worsening safety of journalists situation and violations against freedom of expression. These violations are underlined by the passage of new repressive laws. In this report, Rachad Bani Samari, Programme Associate under MFWA’s Media and Good Governance Programme details how the media and dissenting voices in Benin are being silenced.
“The fear of going to jail is now a lethal weapon used by public officials to muzzle the press,” bemoaned Ignace Soussou, a 32-year-old Beninois investigative journalist, when asked about the situation of press freedom in the country. He gets tensed, a bit uneasy, and tries to crack a smile. Soussou has been a victim of jail terms being used to silence critical journalists.
In the early hours of Friday, December 20, 2019, around 5 am, Ignace Soussou and his family were rudely awoken from sleep following a flurry of bangs on their door. It was a group of armed policemen and anti-cybercrime officials. They had come to arrest Ignace for tweeting remarks made by Benin’s Public Prosecutor during a conference hosted by the French media development agency CFI.
“I did what all journalists do; publish information they believe is critical for the population,” Ignace explained. The Public Prosecutor, however, contested his remarks were taken out of context.
As Ignace was dragged without an arrest warrant to the quarters of the Central Office for the Repression of Cybercrime (OCRC), his five-year-old daughter watched and wailed uncontrollably, piercing the early morning quiet, while his wife leaned at the door, confused, her eyes soaked in tears.
Ignace Sossou is a victim of jail terms being used to silence critical journalists
The high-handed treatment of Ignace Soussou, who was later condemned to 18 months in jail for “harassment by means of electronic communication”, has now become a norm for journalists, bloggers, and online activists in the Republic of Benin, long touted as a democratic beacon, and a shining star for press freedom in Africa.
In 1991, Benin became the first West African nation under military dictatorship to return to democratic governance after Beninois voted out General Mathieu Kérékou who had seized power in a coup in 1972 and ruled the country for 18 years. The 1991 election marked the first time an incumbent military president was peacefully voted out in a West African nation.
The return to multiparty democracy ushered in an environment fertile for the development of the media and free speech as laws considered repressive to the press were repealed giving way to constitutional guarantees relatively protective of freedom of expression and of the press.
“1991 was like the springtime of the media,” recalled Guy Constant Ehoumi, former president of the media self-regulatory body in Benin ODEM. “There was a new constitution guaranteeing freedom of expression and of the press, and the creation of a regulatory institution to protect that freedom”.
Mr. Patrice Talon, the country’s current president, came to power in 2016 promising to consolidate Benin’s democracy. However, many media experts say he has rather weakened it, as his grip over the country has grown increasingly autocratic. Since 2016 Benin has fallen from 78th to 113th in the rankings of press freedom by Reporters Without Borders. The drop in the ranking is due to the adoption of a digital code to regulate the online content, critics say.
A Freedom full of traps – A new digital code
Benin has a population of 12 million and 6.499.553 million internet users. With the growing use of social media, the government deemed it necessary to regulate the online space. Thus, in 2018 the parliament adopted a digital code. One of the main issues addressed by the code is harassment online and the publication of fake news.
In its article 550 on harassment by means of electronic communication, it is stipulated “whoever initiates an online communication coercing, intimidating, harassing, or creating an emotional distress in a person, by means of an information technology system to encourage, and replicate a dangerous and hostile behaviour is punishable by imprisonment of one (1) month to two (2) years or fined any amount from five hundred thousand (500 000) to ten million (10 000 000) CFA Francs, or both”.
On the basis of the above article which also deals with the publication of fake news in its second and third paragraphs, at least 17 journalists, bloggers, and online activists, including Ignace Sossou, have been arrested and prosecuted in less than two years.
The digital code addresses issues relating to harassment online and the publication of fake news in Benin
The most recent arrest occurred in January 2021 when Jean Kpoton, a good governance activist was arrested in Gestapo-style by a squad of policemen, and sentenced to twelve months in jail for commenting on a post alleging that the car used by the President, Mr. Patrice Talon, for his accountability tour across the country in 2020 was rented at 6 million CFA Francs daily. The arrest of Kpoton shows that the digital code is applied not only to journalist, but to citizens too.
“The digital code is all the more dangerous to freedom of expression because it is also applicable to citizens who are involved in or engage with online material found to be Fake,” says Guy Constant.
The freedom formerly enjoyed by citizens and the press in Benin is today at its lowest ebb. Thus, journalists and citizens find themselves in the throes of the law when exercising free speech, and the press operates in an environment kept under watch.
“The digital code is like a Damocles Sword hanging over the heads of journalists. It is a threat to freedom of expression in the country as it reintroduces the criminalization of press offences” says a prominent journalist in the country on conditions of anonymity.
Benin made history in 2015 after the adoption of an information and communication code. Although the code represents a major achievement for press freedom in the country as it includes the right to access information, and outlines easy process for the creation of a media outlet, it prescribes jail term for the publication of Fake News in its article 266.
Although the publication of fake news is a criminal offence under the information code, it had previously not been used against the media, experts in the country say. Since 2018, however, the wanton use of the digital code to crackdown on freedom of expression online in the country is alarming.
With two laws both criminalising press offences online and offline, the media in the country is between a rock and a hard place. The online space which was considered to be a safe haven for freedom of expression has become like hell and the propensity of public officials to drag journalists to court has created a climate of fear and a culture of silence in the press.
“Journalist are scared to do critical reports. The fake news tag can be pegged to their publications if it is not to the taste of an official. And we know the implications: Jail time. Today in Benin, it is easier to arrest and jail a journalist than a thief,” said Ignace Soussou.
The chain of disaster for freedom of expression and of the press in the country is further worsened by the harsh economic landscape in which the media operates.
A Financially Strangulated Media
Thirty years following the “springtime of the media in Benin, financial sustainability is still a severe test for private media outlets. Most media organisations in the country depend on communication and advertisement contracts from the government to stay afloat. Since the 90s till recent times, 80% of media outlets obtain 80% of their revenues from the government.
With a relatively small private sector, advertisements from the corporate sector are few and most of them are directed towards state-owned media organisations, to the detriment of private outlets.
In 1997, the state adopted a media support policy consisting of injecting yearly funds to support the media. In the 90s, the fund was estimated at 300 million CFA Francs, however, as the number of media houses increased, the amount was reviewed to 350 million CFA Francs. The fund has over the years helped media outlets survive the harsh economic environment, and used as a tool to improve media professionalism.
However, since the advent of a new government in 2016, private media outlets have seen their revenues from the state gradually dwindle. All advertisement contracts from the government, and the media support fund were suspended in 2016. It was only in 2018 when a part of the fund was released, but, since then, private media organisations have been left to struggle.
“The situation is worrying,” says ASSOGBA Fortuné, General Secretary of the media owners’ association in Benin (CNPA) “radio stations and Televisions get few contracts on communiqués, and airtime, but newspapers are dying”.
The print media is struggling to survive following the suspension of the media support fund
The situation is further worsened by a tax regime threatening to cripple the media in Benin as the government does not distinguish a media organisation from other lucrative businesses. Meanwhile, article 40 of the 2015 Information and Communication Code provides tax reliefs for the media.
“We are taxed as other profit-making businesses, meanwhile we are not making profit. The context has already forced TV Carrefour to close for some time before coming back amidst the sacking of a dozen of journalists. Several outlets might follow suit,” says ASSOGBA Fortuné.
Due to their financial vulnerability, the media in the country is perceived to have fallen prey to “political capture” by the regime, as the government has bilateral contracts with specific media outlets, who in turn feel beholden to it and reluctant to criticise its actions thus, undermining their watchdog role. This became further evident during the April 2021 presidential election when, the usually vibrant media, known to organise debates among parties, went silent.
“The current conditions in which the media operates make it difficult to criticise the government. We just ended an election during which we did not see any serious debates between candidates and critical reports on the government’s development projects,” said Guy Constant.
The weak financial sustainability of the media is threatening the very existence of credible media as some owners sacrifice their editorial independence on the altar of access to funds to survive. According to Reporters Without Borders, since the Election of President Patrice Talon, pro-government reporting guidelines are sent to the press after cabinet meetings. This poses a serious threat to editorial freedom of the media.
The current context in Benin threatens freedom of expression and of the press, and calls for urgent multi-pronged solutions from stakeholders to turn the tide for a return to a resilient, responsible, and professional media industry working for the promotion of development. It is hence essential for:
The government to:
Revise the digital code and repeal article 550 and all other articles repressive of freedom of expression and of the press;
Make use of the right to response or rejoinders in media publications where there are errors, and treat press offences as civil cases;
Collaborate with the media owners’ association CNPA and ODEM to reinstate the media support fund, and provide tax reliefs to the media.
Journalists to:
Resolutely abide by the media code of ethics, and refrain from biased reporting,
Fact-check reports before publications and refrain from the scoop culture,
Get a good understanding of the laws regulating their profession.
Media owners and associations to:
Initiate engagements with the government to discuss the review of laws considered repressive to freedom of expression and of the press;
Educate journalists on the current legislations regulating the media and ensure professionalism in publications;
Advocate for the instauration of the media support fund;
Explore innovative revenue generation models to ensure long-term sustainability.
The Media Foundation for West Africa is disturbed by the incidence of harassment of peaceful protesters by the Nigerian security forces and enjoins the authorities to bring to book the police officer who shot a teargas canister at activist Omoyele Sowore.
Omoyele Sowore was on May 31, 2021, injured by a teargas canister allegedly fired by a policewoman while he and others were protesting against widespread insecurity in Nigeria.
The incident happened at Abuja, Nigeria’s capital city, at a rally organised by the Alliance on Surviving COVID-19 and Beyond (ASCAB).
ASCAB is a non-profit group led by human rights lawyer and MFWA board member, Mr Femi Falana – who led the Lagos version of the protest.
In Abuja, MFWA gathered that Sowore and other protesters were approaching the protest venue when the police shut down the place. They had arrived in five-truck loads bristling with weapons.
Locked out of the protest ground, the crowd started singing solidarity songs and began to stream live on social media. But the police scared them away and targeted prominent activist Sowore with tear gas. Footage of the incident streamed on social media showed Sowore standing by the locked gate and a few minutes later falling on the ground after a tear gas canister hit him. Another footage showed the activist being rushed to a hospital in Abuja, holding his belly in pain. Blood marks were observed on his body.
Thankfully, he was discharged from the hospital on June 1, 2021, a day after the incident. However, he said he was not only hit by a tear gas canister but was also shot by a riot gun. After his discharge, he posted a video clip to his social media accounts narrating the shooting incident.
“From nowhere, a policewoman came and approached me with a riot gun. At a close range, she looked at me and shot me. I started to bleed. I noticed that blood was running underneath my trousers. I couldn’t walk again,” Sowore narrated in a statement afterward.
However, the police have denied shooting at Sowore or harassing any protester.
The spokesperson for the Federal Capital Territory Police Command, Ms Mariam Yusuf, said contrary to the activist’s claims, the police operatives were deployed in the scene only to restore calm.
“The protesters, who went on the rampage were resisted by police operatives in order to prevent them from causing a breakdown of the law and order. There is no record of such an incident as of the time of this release,” Yusuf said in a statement obtained by MFWA.
But expressing anger at the police conduct, a human rights lawyer, Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, said the police should know that Sowore was only exercising his fundamental rights by joining a rally to demand good governance and an end to insecurity.
“The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in its section 40, allows freedom of assembly, and in section 39, it grants to every citizen the freedom of expression,” he said.
The MFWA condemns the violation of the right to peaceful assembly by the Nigerian police. We urge the authorities to investigate the attack on Sorowe to bring the culprits to book and ensure that the right to peaceful protest is fully respected.
Are you a journalist based in Nigeria, Ghana, Gambia, Liberia and Sierra Leone with an interest in covering international criminal justice, the Courts, Human rights and Anti-corruption issues?
The Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA) is inviting interested candidates to apply for a Two-day Virtual training on the international criminal justice system. The training is being organised by the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs under its Digital Influentials Program on International Order.
1.0 Objective of the training
To educate and enhance journalists’ knowledge on the rule of law, International (Criminal) Justice, and the role of the Netherland-based institutions like the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Criminal Court (ICC).
To educate journalist to gain a better understanding of how the ICJ and other tribunals in the Netherland function in delivering justice.
2.0 Duration and Specific Dates
Tuesday & Wednesday – June 29 &30, 2021
2.1 Methodology
The training will be VIRTUAL (online).
Selected journalists will participate in a two-hour Webinar each day.
Day 1: Monday, June 28 – Preparation Session – 9am to 10am GMT (1 hour)
Day 2: Tuesday June 29 – Training Day 1 – 9am to 11am GMT (2 hours)
Day 3: Tuesday June 30 – Training Day 2 – 9am to 11am GMT (2 hours)
The training will comprise interactive presentations from seasoned professionals of the International Court of Justice sourced from the Netherlands, breakout sessions, and plenary discussions
2.2 Data Cost and Training Certificates
Each participant will receive some modest support to cover data cost for participating in the Webinars.
Participants will also receive certificate of participation.
2.3 Participant Eligibility
Interested applicants should be West African journalists based in anglophone West Africa countries (Ghana, Nigeria, The Gambia, Sierra Leone and Liberia) with an interest in international (criminal) Justice Reporting, Court reporting, Human rights reporting and Anti-corruption reporting. A total of 15 influential journalists will be selected.
3.0 Additional Background on the Training:
In 1946, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) began operations as the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. The Court was established to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes between States submitted to it, and, to give advisory opinions on legal matters referred to it by duly authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies.
This year the ICJ is celebrating its 75th anniversary, and as part of the celebration activities, the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs is organizing a digital Influential Program for journalists to gain a better understanding of how the ICJ and other tribunals in the Netherland function in delivering justice.
4.0 Mode of Application:
Interested journalists should submit a one pager Write-Up to the MFWA. This should focus on highlighting a Brief profile of the journalist (not more than 150 words) and Reasons (not more than 150 words) why he or she should be considered.
Email the Write-up to the following Contact Persons:
