THE PRESS AND FUNDAMENTAL OBJECTIVES AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY

THE PRESS AND FUNDAMENTAL OBJECTIVES AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY

As the debate on the desirability or otherwise of the new Press Law pending before the National Assembly at its hallowed chambers continue to rage, I like to point out an important aspect of our Constitutional provisions as regards the press and its freedom which the framers of the Constitution in being clever by half made non justiciable, in the hope that necessary amendments may be made to the present effort or that the National Assembly may take cognizance of this in the Constitutional review it is presently undertaking.

I have canvassed elsewhere that the 1999 Constitution and many others before it were deliberately made tenuous and unworkable. In my view no other provision of the constitution drives the point home more that the Constitution was not designed to work than the obnoxious provisions of Chapter II of the Constitution known as Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy. The Chapter provided that it shall be the duty and responsibility of all organs of Government, and of all authorities and persons, exercising legislative, executive or judicial powers, to conform to, observe and apply the provisions of that Chapter of the Constitution. But in a curious twist, the same Constitution in what an informed commentator has likened to lying against itself in one fall sweep made the provisions non justiciable. Exactly what are these provisions? The Chapter provides for Political, Economic, Social, Educational, Foreign policy and Environmental objectives of state policy. These rights which roughly correlate with the third generation rights now recognized by the United Nations Organisation and espoused in several international documents/instruments are now treated as basic rights which any nation serious about development should incorporate in its constitution and make justiciable because rights such as the one to education and clean water are hardly negotiable any more.

A Constitution is a serious document, these rights should not be contained in it if they are non justiciable and in a tongue in cheek macabre, the Chapter further provided that the press, radio, television and other agencies of the mass media shall at all times be free to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this Chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the Government to the people. Just how will the mass media fulfill this obligation when this section is non justiciable? The fourth estate of the realm is in no way protected, laws that gag the press abounds and yet the Constitution will not even protect media houses and media practitioners.

Whatever informed the non justiciability of this Chapter of the Constitution? Some informed commentators have pointed out the deluge of court actions that will arise as a result of the leeway its justiciability will give citizens to enforce these rights and the fear that the Government of the Federation will never be able to meet the cost of guaranteeing these rights to every Nigerian. However founded these concerns may be, it must be borne in mind that if Chapter II of the Constitution is made justiciable, our Law courts will in no time rise to the occasion and formulate rules that will checkmate the expected floodgate of cases sifting and identifying deserving ones as a result.

This point is particularly important because the role of the media in a democracy cannot be overemphasized and in the unique case of Nigeria, the media ought to be feted and not fettered because in more ways than one, the press in Nigeria has helped keep hope alive and have continually demanded accountability from those who would rather rule than govern us. Let us not forget that were it not for the courageous media practitioners with great personal and sometimes fatal risk, we would not have democracy today. They fought the Military junta’s of Muhammadu Buhari, Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida, Sanni Abacha and Abdulsalami Abubakar to a standstill. They have kept the memory of June 12 alive to this day. Were it not for the media, the Siemens/Halliburton scandals and many like it, the Abacha loot and the misdemeanors of Obasanjo’s imperial presidency would since have been trampled underfoot, buried and forgotten. All hail the press and let us give force to the words of one of America’s founding fathers – Thomas Jefferson – who wrote that, ‘were it left for me to decide whether to have a government without a newspaper or a newspaper without a government, I will not hesitate to choose the latter’. For me, this brilliantly sums up in a poignant way the role and importance of the press especially in an emerging democracy as ours.

The provision of the 1999 Constitution on the obligation of the mass media is one provision that must be removed from Chapter II and made justiciable so the mass media can properly fulfill its assigned Constitutional mandate of freedom to uphold the fundamental objectives contained in this Chapter and uphold the responsibility and accountability of the Government to the people if we will not make Chapter II of the Constitution justiciable in its entirety.

STEPHEN O. OBAJAJA is a Partner at the Lagos Law Firm of Fountain Court Partners.