LAGOS — The Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria (NPAN) has dragged the Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria (APCON) and the Inspector General of Police to court over a code enacted by the council which infringes on the right of members of the association to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinion and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference.
In a suit filed at the Federal High Court, Lagos by the chambers of Tayo Oyetibo, NPAN is asking the court to determine:
*Whether having regard to the provision of Section 1 (d) of Advertising Practitioners (Registration, etc) Act CAP A7,LFN 2004, Articles 21 and 137(a) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion are not ultra vires the Advertising Practitioner Council of Nigeria (APCON) in so far as the provisions of the Articles affect media houses who do not engage in the practice of advertising;
*Whether the provisions of Articles 21 and 137(a) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion are not inconsistent with the provisions of Section 39.of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 which guarantees the freedom of expression including freedom to hold opinion, and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference;
*Whether having regard to the provision of section 4 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 it is competent for the Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria to create offences and impose penalties as done in the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion.
Declarations
The association is, therefore, praying for:
* A DECLARATION that Articles 21 and 137(a) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion are ultra vires the Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria in so far as the provisions of the Articles affect members of the Plaintiff’s Association who do not engage in the practice of advertising;
*A DECLARATION that Article 21 of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion which require that all advertisements except public notices, goodwill messages, obituaries and vacancies shall be presented for vetting and approval by the Advertising Standards Panel (ASP) before publication is inconsistent with the provisions of section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 and therefore is unconstitutional, null and void;
*A DECLARATION that the Advertising Practitioner Council of Nigeria has no power under the Advertising Practitioners (Registration Etc) Act Cap A7 Laws of the Federation 2004 to create criminal offences and impose penalties as done in Article 137 (a) (b) and (c) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising practice and Sales Promotion and as such the said Article 137 (a) (b) and (c) is unconstitutional null and void;
*A PERPETUAL INJUNCTION restraining the 1st Defendant from treating or continuing to treat Articles 21 and 137 (a) of Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion as valid Articles in the Code
* A PERPETUAL INJUNCTION restraining the Defendants whether by themselves, their servants or agents and or representatives from implementing, or otherwise applying the provisions of Articles 21 and 137 (a) (b) and (c) of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and Sales Promotion against any of the members of the Plaintiff’s Association or their servants officers or representatives.
The genesis
In a 22-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Comfort Obi, General Secretary of the association, she averred that: “On April 16, 2012, officers of the 2nd Defendant issued a letter of invitation to one of the members of the Plaintiff/Association namely Leadership Newspaper Group Ltd, publishers of ‘Leadership Newspapers‘ whereby the media house was informed of an investigation being carried out by the Police following a complaint by the 1st Defendant of the violation of the provisions of Article 21 of the Nigerian Code of Advertising Practice and sales promotion.
According to her, “Leadership Newspaper was then requested in the letter to release some of their members of staff for interrogation.
“Upon arrival at the FCT Police Command on the appointed date, that is, April 25, 2012, the members of staff of Leadership Newspaper were subjected to interrogation by the Police on the allegation of violation of Article 21 of the Code and released on bail.
“On June 7, 2012, another letter was issued by the Police to another member of the Plaintiff/Association namely Vanguard Media Ltd, publishers of Vanguard Newspapers informing the media house of investigations being carried out by the Police pursuant to a complaint by the 1st Defendant of the violation by the media house of Article 21 of the Code. The letter then listed certain names who were to be released for questioning by the Police.
“The invited persons honoured the Police invitations whereupon they were also subjected to interrogation before they were released. In the course of investigation by the Police the invited persons were threatened with further arrest and prosecution for allegedly violating the provisions of the code.
She further averred that “unless the defendants are restrained as prayed, they would continue to harass and intimidate members of the Plaintiff/Association and their staff with threat of arrest and prosecution in purported implementation of the provisions of Articles 21 and 137 of the aforementioned code.
“I verily believe that APCON does not have the power to regulate activities of members of the Plaintiff or any of their employees who are not registered members of APCON or practising advertising.
“I also believe that the provisions of Articles 21 and 137 of the code are inconsistent with section 39 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
‘”In the premise of the foregoing facts, I verily believe that it would be in consonance with the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 if the reliefs being sought by the Plaintiff are granted.”
