Editorial

Declining Fortunes Of Press Freedom

Published

3 years ago

May 4, 2022

This year’s World Press Freedom Day (WPFD) was observed yesterday, May 3, 2020, to high light the fundamental principles of press freedom, and to defend the media from attacks on their independence. WPFD is also known as World Press Day. The day similarly honours journalists who were killed and aims at spreading awareness about the primacy of press freedom.
WPFD is a scheme from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) to bolster and think about the function of media organisations and professionals. Its objective is to hold governments to account for their undertaking to freedom of the press and to enable the press to reflect on professional ethics. Freedom of the press fosters a more democratic, stronger and inclusive society and is essential for the protection and promotion of human rights.
The theme of this year’s International Press Freedom Day is “Journalism Under Digital Siege.” The goal is to underline the role of information in an online media environment. Many independent and dedicated journalists and media workers around the world keep exposing injustice in their countries and contribute to building a better future. A lot are encountering daily assault, brutality and stalking, both online and offline.
World Press Day was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in December, 1993, following the recommendation of UNESCO’s General Conference. Since then, May 3, the anniversary of the Declaration of Windhoek, the Namibian capital, has been celebrated worldwide as World Press Freedom Day.
Freedom of the press is widely acknowledged to be the engine of democracy. Thomas Macaulay, the British statesman and historian in the 19th century, said, “The Fourth Estate ranks in importance equally with the three estates of the realm, the Lords Spiritual, the Lords Temporal and the Lords Common.” As the French writer, Benjamin Constant, noted, “With newspapers, there is sometimes disorder; without them, there is always slavery.”
Regrettably, press freedom has come under relentless onslaughts in Nigeria despite clear provisions of the 1999 Constitution in Section 39. For instance, the two journalists shot to death in July, 2019 and January, while covering the demonstrations of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria, are only two extremes.
Police, military and other security personnel regularly harass journalists and media outfits. In January, 2019, armed soldiers and Department of State Services (DSS) agents raided the Daily Trust offices in Maiduguri, Borno State and Lagos at the same time. They apprehended two journalists, alleging that the newspaper “leaked classified military information and sapped national security.”
Police in Ebonyi State, following threats by Governor David Umahi to “ban” the duo for alleged inauspicious reports, independently arrested the correspondents of The Sun and The Vanguard newspapers in Abakaliki, the state capital. This is not all. Journalists also learnt of Governor Ben Ayade’s rant and rave in Cross River State, where one of them, Agba Jalingo, was suspected of treason.
In February, 2020, the Committee to Protect Journalists disclosed how the police and the DSS had been improperly using the Nigerian Communications Act 2003 to tap into phones to track and lure journalists into detention. The law requires network service providers to help security agencies with crime prevention and national security, but it has often been used to badger the media.
Subsequent to the extensive attacks on journalists after Jones Abiri, Agba Jalingo and Omoyele Sowore, an online editor, were detained, The Guardian of London cautioned that under the regime of President Muhammadu Buhari, a “climate of fear” appeared looming as continuous attempts to gag the press “could herald a return to the dark days of military rule.” We agree. These may be well-known in dictatorships, but they are the very converse in democracies.
The mugging has to stop. Harassment should be combated by the appropriate use of the law. Like the illustrious human rights lawyer, the late Gani Fawehinmi, took up the case of Minere Amakiri, a journalist who was sequestered, whipped and forcefully shaven on the orders of the then military governor of old Rivers State, Alfred Diete-Spiff, public-spirited lawyers should provide services to oppressed journalists, especially smaller ones, and online outlets.
There is no hesitancy that Buhari would not have been President without a free press. Power is short-lived; Buhari has long been in opposition. As spokesman for the opposition party, Lai Mohammed used the free press and social media with merciless ardency against the Goodluck Jonathan administration. Leaders should expand on the democratic space instead of shutting it down.
Maria Ressa, a journalist, and founder of the news organisation, Rappler, in the Philippines, said in 2018: “You don’t really know who you are until you’re forced to fight to defend it … We will hold the line.” Nigerian journalists should hold the line here as well. All Nigerians have a duty to defend the rights to free expression and the press. That is where we stand!

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

22 hours ago

September 22, 2025

Uchechukwu Okwum

Nigeria’s Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) has unveiled a gratuitous proposal to increase the salaries of political and public office holders in the country. This plan seeks to fatten the pay packets of the president, vice-president, governors, deputy governors, and members of the National and State Assemblies. At a time when the nation is struggling to steady its economy, the suggestion that political leaders should be rewarded with more money is not only misplaced but insulting to the sensibilities of the ordinary Nigerian.

What makes the proposal even more opprobrious is the dire economic condition under which citizens currently live. The cost of living crisis has worsened, inflation has eroded the purchasing power of workers, and the naira continues to tumble against foreign currencies. The majority of Nigerians are living hand to mouth, with many unable to afford basic foodstuffs, medical care, and education. Against this backdrop, political office holders, who already enjoy obscene allowances, perks, and privileges, should not even contemplate a salary increase.

It is, therefore, not surprising that the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has stepped in to challenge this development. SERAP has filed a lawsuit against the RMAFC to halt the implementation of this salary increment. This resolute move represents a voice of reason and accountability at a time when public anger against political insensitivity is palpable. The group is rightly insisting that the law must serve as a bulwark against impunity.

According to a statement issued by SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, the commission has been dragged before the Federal High Court in Abuja. Although a hearing date remains unconfirmed, the momentous step of seeking judicial redress reflects a determination to hold those in power accountable. SERAP has once again positioned itself as a guardian of public interest by challenging an elite-centric policy.

The case, registered as suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1834/2025, specifically asks the court to determine “whether RMAFC’s proposed salary hike for the president, vice-president, governors and their deputies, and lawmakers in Nigeria is not unlawful, unconstitutional and inconsistent with the rule of law.” This formidable question goes to the very heart of democratic governance: can those entrusted with public resources decide their own pay rises without violating the constitution and moral order?

In its pleadings, SERAP argues that the proposed hike runs foul of both the 1999 Nigerian Constitution and the RMAFC Act. By seeking a judicial declaration that such a move is unlawful, unconstitutional, and inconsistent with the rule of law, the group has placed a spotlight on the tension between self-serving leadership and constitutionalism. To trivialise such an issue would be harum-scarum, for the constitution remains the supreme authority guiding governance.

We wholeheartedly commend SERAP for standing firm, while we roundly condemn RMAFC’s selfish proposal. Political office should never be an avenue for financial aggrandisement. Since our leaders often pontificate sacrifice to citizens, urging them to tighten their belts in the face of economic turbulence, the same leaders must embody sacrifice themselves. Anything short of this amounts to double standards and betrayal of trust.

The Nigerian economy is not buoyant enough to shoulder the additional cost of a salary increase for political leaders. Already, lawmakers and executives enjoy allowances that are grossly disproportionate to the national average income. These earnings are sufficient not only for their needs but also their unchecked greed. To even consider further increments under present circumstances is egregious, a slap in the face of ordinary workers whose minimum wage remains grossly insufficient.

Resources earmarked for such frivolities should instead be channelled towards alleviating the suffering of citizens and improving the nation’s productive capacity. According to United Nations statistics, about 62.9 per cent of Nigerians were living in multidimensional poverty in 2021, compared to 53.7 per cent in 2017. Similarly, nearly 30.9 per cent of the population lives below the international poverty line of US$2.15 per day. These figures paint a stark picture: Nigeria is a poor country by all measurable standards, and any extra naira diverted to elite pockets deepens this misery.

Besides, the timing of this proposal could not be more inappropriate. At a period when unemployment is soaring, inflation is crippling households, and insecurity continues to devastate communities, the RMAFC has chosen to pursue elite enrichment. It is widely known that Nigeria’s economy is in a parlous state, and public resources should be conserved and wisely invested. Political leaders must show prudence, not profligacy.

Another critical dimension is the national debt profile. According to the Debt Management Office, Nigeria’s total public debt as of March 2025 stood at a staggering N149.39 trillion. External debt obligations also remain heavy, with about US$43 billion outstanding by September 2024. In such a climate of debt-servicing and borrowing to fund budgets, it is irresponsible for political leaders to even table the idea of inflating their salaries further. Debt repayment, not self-reward, should occupy their minds.

This ignoble proposal is insensitive, unnecessary, and profoundly reckless. It should be discarded without further delay. Public office is a trust, not an entitlement to wealth accumulation. Nigerians deserve leaders who will share in their suffering, lead by example, and prioritise the common good over self-indulgence. Anything less represents betrayal of the social contract and undermines the fragile democracy we are striving to build.

Editorial

No To Political Office Holders’ Salary Hike

Published

23 hours ago

September 22, 2025

The Tide

Editorial

Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

September 8, 2025

The Tide

The Rivers State Government deserves commendation for the manner in which it conducted the last biometric exercise for pensioners in the state. For the first time in many years, the verification process was not only efficient but also humane, a development that has brought relief to a category of citizens that often bears the brunt of neglect.

Unlike previous verification exercises that left pensioners exhausted and unattended, the latest exercise set a refreshing precedent. Retirees were given proper and sumptuous meals, and in addition, the government paid the sum of N10,000 into their accounts to cushion their transportation costs. Such gestures go a long way in demonstrating that those who had laboured for the state are not forgotten in their twilight years.

The measure was particularly necessary given that some pensioners had to travel long distances to reach their verification centres. For elderly men and women, such journeys come with physical and financial strain. By recognising these realities and easing the burden, the government has shown that pensioners deserve dignity, not disdain.

Beyond this laudable act of consideration, the authorities must reflect on the very structure of pension verification. The era of compelling retirees to be physically present for routine verification should be reconsidered. With digital tools and innovation, the government can adopt systems that capture and confirm data without the stress of physical assembly. This is crucial for pensioners residing in other states or even abroad.

While we acknowledge the importance of verification in cleaning up pension records, we cannot ignore the darker side of the matter. It is regrettable that some allowances continue to be paid to deceased pensioners, with relatives fraudulently collecting the funds. The latest biometrics, thankfully, exposed some of these sharp practices. The exercise, therefore, is not only about order but also about justice.

We urge families of deceased pensioners to be patriotic enough to inform the government of the deaths of their loved ones. It is deeply shameful that in some instances, individuals attempted to impersonate late pensioners during the biometrics. Such behaviour undermines the spirit of honesty and deprives genuine retirees of their due entitlements.

The exercise also revealed another important area of concern: the health of pensioners. It is reassuring to learn that the state government has reportedly promised to take over the medical treatment of some retirees who arrived for the biometrics in critical condition. This is a step in the right direction. Elderly citizens, after years of service, should have access to special health care facilities in the state. Setting aside hospitals or designated centres for the aged is not just desirable but necessary.

While pension payments in Rivers State have remained consistent, attention must now be directed towards gratuities. Senior citizens deserve to receive their retirement benefits without the bureaucratic hitches that have often marred the process. After years of loyal service, nothing is more demoralising than to see retirees languish for want of their gratuities. Every worker, as Scripture reminds us, is worthy of his wage.

Retirement, in any civilised society, should not be reduced to a sentence of suffering. In dealing with pensioners, government must consistently wear a human face. The humane manner displayed during this verification exercise should not be a one-off. It must become the norm in all dealings with retirees. Measures must continually be put in place to ensure that they do not feel abandoned by the state they served.

One welcome innovation has already been introduced. The Sole Administrator of Rivers State, Vice Admiral (Rtd) Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, has altered the method of gratuity payment. Pensioners now receive their monies directly into their bank accounts, eliminating the cheque-based system that for years served as fertile ground for corruption. This reform is both pragmatic and forward-looking. Similarly, the implementation of the N32,000 pension harmonisation is also commendable.

Direct payments gratuities ensure transparency and drastically reduce the possibility of diversion of funds. More importantly, they restore confidence in the system and assure pensioners that their entitlements will reach them without interference. In this way, the government has not only safeguarded the process but also upheld the principle of accountability.

Seamless gratuity payment has a ripple effect on the workforce as a whole. When workers are confident that retirement will not plunge them into hardship, the temptation to falsify age in order to remain in service is eliminated. Such reforms, therefore, enhance efficiency, honesty, and productivity in the public service.

In sum, the Rivers State Government has struck a refreshing chord in its handling of pension verification. It has shown empathy, innovation, and accountability. However, the momentum must be sustained, and the focus must shift towards modernising verification methods and prioritising retirees’ welfare in health, gratuity, and dignity.

When retirees are treated with compassion and fairness, the message to those still in service is clear: faithful service to the state will not go unrewarded. The humane verification exercise, though a single event, offers a hopeful glimpse of what governance can look like when people, especially the elderly, are placed at the heart of policy.