How weighty is Omoyele Sowore’s case against mainstream media over exclusion?

Whenever the name Omoyele Sowore is mentioned, what usually comes to mind is The Sahara Reporters, a media platform he founded, some years back. He has deployed the platform to a maximum effect in his citizens’ journalism project, leveraging on technology of new and traditional media, like many others across the globe today. He promotes citizens’ journalism, by encouraging everyday people to report stories about corruption, human rights abuses and other political misconduct in Africa, with a special focus on Nigeria, according to his Wikipedia profile.

Sahara Reporters is an online media platform that has been very critical of the establishment. Beyond that, however, Sowore, a human right activist, social crusader, and politician, was, and is still, the presidential candidate of the African Action Alliance in 2019 and in the ongoing process of the 2023 general election, respectively. He is known for his radical views on issues of national importance – something that has earned him haters and admirers in almost equal measures across the land and in the corridor of power.

Last Sunday, August 28, 2022, on Arise TV’s Morning Show, I watched him make a very strong indictment against the mainstream media for allegedly excluding him from public debate about ‘Project Nigeria’. The indictment came when one of the anchors asked him whether he was invited, or not, by the organisers of the just-concluded 2022 Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) annual conference which took place in Lagos where some presidential candidates or their representatives featured in a debate, expressing their respective views on how Nigeria can be moved forward. He responded, alleging that his exclusion from the 2022 NBA annual conference by the organisers is part of a grand scheme of denying him opportunities for him to sell his candidacy and vision to the people of this country. He revealed that he, however, did reach out to the immediate past (then outgoing) chairman of the NBA, Olumide Akpata, through a telephone number without getting any response as to why no invitation was extended to him.

According to the former student’s union president of the University of Lagos, Akpata’s failure to respond to his text messages is a confirmation of the fact that the association is, probably, acting under the influence of some political forces that are feeling threatened by the rise of his (Sowore’s) movements #TakeItBack, #RevolutionNow and #WeCan’tContinueLikeThis.

Those who know Sowore very well would attest to it that he is someone who is not given to diplomacy while expressing his views on any issue of national importance. He takes no prisoner, he would not swallow phlegm in the name of decorum, hence the mild and systemic excommunication and exclusion from national debates by some mainstream media platforms, and civil society organisations, pandering to the fear of some political interests who do not want to be ruffled by Sowore’s acerbic tongue. To those media organisations, the fear of Sowore is the beginning of wisdom. But why? The answer, I shall attempt to provide, shortly.

He made a particular mention of how the media, a constituency to which he belongs, had been part of the scheming, getting him out of presidential debates since 2018. And in fairness to him, I could remember some years back and not too long ago when schedules of interview sessions with him advertised on social media by about two of the most popular television stations in the country were cancelled abruptly without explanations or a re-scheduling. He, however, cut his host, Arise TV, some slack even though he said they could have done more than they do hosting him, in contravention of the alleged hidden agenda by the country’s political hegemony that he appears to threaten.

Talking about why some mainstream media organisations are avoiding hosting him; there is no denying the fact that the Sahara Reporters’ publisher is an acerbic critic of the current administration, whose choices of words could at times, make a TV host palpitate, especially when you remember the harsh provision of the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) codes. Nevertheless, I still believe that it is not enough reason to excommunicate or exclude him from the national debate. It is violence against his democratic right to freedom of expression and a blatant violation of some extant laws. Nigerians live in very hard times and need people who think out-of-the-box and at the imminent risk of sounding pro-Sowore, I’d say, he is one of those people with very novel ideas on how the country can get herself out of the current, seeming socioeconomic cul-de-sac. Remember his proposed marijuana policy? Okay.

Meanwhile, one can hardly blame those media houses that systematically avoid Sowore and his likes, especially, if one considers the fact that the NBC code is the most potent anti-freedom, anti-liberty and anti-democratic instrument at the disposal of the federal government against any media that is perceived as being not-too-friendly towards the administration. Its mode of application is laden with a lot of extrajudicial tendencies. For instance, the commission would be the one to accuse, prosecute, and at the same time, judge. Remember the Latin maxim, which says; you cannot be a judge in your own case – Nemo iudex in causa sua. Section 3. 1.1 is very instructive in this regard. It states among other things: “No broadcast shall encourage, or incite to crime, lead to public disorder, or hate, be repugnant to public feelings or contain an offensive reference to any person or organisation, alive or dead, or generally be disrespectful to human dignity”. Who determines what constitutes an incitement, or repugnant? Of course, the commission determines what constitutes incitement, or repugnant to public feelings. This is done, without the benefit of a fair hearing for the accused station.

Meanwhile, hardly can any of Sowore’s media engagements pass the test of this provision, but the media must remember one thing, and that is, the provision of the 1999 constitution, in section 22, where it is 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”.

We, in the 4th estate of the realm, must understand and appreciate the spirit and letter of the above-quoted provision. We, therefore, must be resolute in our resolve to, at all times, uphold the truth by holding the government accountable and responsible in the application of law in the process of governance. In the NBC code, it is stated in Section 5.3.3(C…), that; “in adherence to the principle of pluralism, accord equitable airtime to all political parties or views, with particular regards to the duration and belt, during political campaign periods”.

It is, therefore, a violation of the law, by any media house that dedicates its airtime to covering a political debate that excludes some parties, or their candidates, regardless of who the organisers are. If they invite all the candidates and still get sanctioned, I think the law court is there to interpret the law, as provided for, in the constitution. But this, unfortunately, appears not to be the case. Meanwhile, that courage and determination to be exonerated, and extricated from the allegation against the mainstream media organisation in the country, by Sowore must be mustered to launder the image of practitioners in the industry, to feature on the right side of history. This can only be done, by doing the right thing, which is to accommodate all candidates in every presidential debate, except any one of them who, out of his own volition, chooses not to attend.

What would those avoiding Sowore have done assuming the national assembly had heeded calls by many Nigerians to enact a law making presidential debate mandatory for all contestants?

There is always this insinuation that brown envelopes must have exchanged hands whenever the media is perceived to be pro-government or pro-establishment. Nothing lends more credence to such insinuations than this methodical exclusion of a Sowore who even belongs, somewhat, in the same constituency.

Sowore, it must be noted, is a victim of his platform’s consistence, in its campaign for change. Being a pro-change organisation, it came in very handily when the then opposition and now the ruling party, All Progressives Congress (APC) adopted the mantra of “Change”, as its slogan in the build-up to the 2015 general election. As a result, a lot of people erroneously equated it with the media arm of APC’s “change” agenda. The erroneous view was held by both pro and anti-APC netizens. But by the time the difference in the notion of change as envisioned by Sowore and his Sahara Reporters from that of the APC-led federal government became more pronounced, the publisher, his platform become demonised by the establishment those who could not discern the juncture at which they parted ways. It became worse when Sowore joined active partisan politics vying for the presidency, which culminates in the crux of this piece.

If one considers the divine role the press is to play in a democracy, especially, as spelt out in section 22 of the 1999 constitution then, Sowore’s allegation against the mainstream media is hardly deniable and must be given serious consideration with a view to making amend. This is because Sowore’s case in my estimation is a very solid and weighty one against not only the media but also the NBA and other civil society organisations that organise presidential (or national political) debates without extending invitations to some candidates for whatever reason. There is, however, an ample opportunity for the indicted organisations especially the media to right the wrongs now that the embargo is about to be lifted on political campaign, preparatory to the 2023 general election.

Loathe or love him, you’ve got to give it to the Ondo Creek Boy, history is on his side. Sowore and his AAC came 11th, in the last presidential election out of the 73 contestants; scoring a total of 33,953 votes. It, therefore, sounds ludicrous for anybody to want to sideline such a candidate in anything that aspires to be referred to as a national debate, let alone, a presidential one for that matter.

Abubakar writes from Ilorin. He can be reached via 08051388285 or [email protected]