NIGERIA MEDIA MONITOR
#03-11 MONDAY, MARCH 16, 1998
* PUBLISHER ARRESTED; TELEVISON CHIEF ASSAULTED * JOURNALISTS BEATEN; ARRESTED AT PRO-DEMOCRACY RALLY * DETAINEES'WIVES MEETING DISRUPTED * GOVT. RECALLS SUSPENDED TV BOSSES * MURDERED JOURNALIST BURIED; POLICE ARREST SUSPECTS * BROADCAST STATIONS MAY LOSE LICENCES * SUNRAY FOLDS UP; HERALD GOES PLC * REVIEWING CABLE AND SATELITE BRAODCASTING LAW POLICE ARREST PUBLISHER OF THE RISING SUN Publisher of The Rising Sun newpaper, Mr. Joshua Ogbonna,has been arrested by the police. Premier House communications, publishers of the paper,said in Lagos March 11 that Ogbonna was picked up by policemen at about 2:p.m on 9 March, 1998 at the Apapa, Lagos offices of the company.Mr David Maduako, a journalist with the newspaper said the publisher was arrested by two policemen from the homicide section of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) Ikoyi, Lagos. Maduako said the policemen grave no reason for his arrest athough they said they were sent by a deputy superintendent of police He said however that the arrest might not be unconnected with a series of articles on a proprietor of an Abuja-based hotel and father of a prominent pro-Abacha campaigner The journalist explained that the articles dwelt mainly on the activities of the hotel proprietor and his life style. Maduako said the proprietor had earlier engaged the services of officers and men of the now defunct police Headquarters, zone 6, Aba, to attack the publisher at his Lagos residence. POLICE ASSAULT TN JOURNALIST (IFEX's partner in Nigeria/IFEX - On 10 March 1998, Abdul Rahmn Maliki, a journalist with Kwara State Television, was beaten by a detachment of policemen in Ilorin, Kwara. Maliki was in Ilorin to cover a protest march by students of Kwara State Polytechnic over the increasing scarcity of fuel in the state. The police were attempting to prevent the demonstration and media reports of it when they spotted Maliki recording the event. JOURNALISTS BEATEN, ARRESTED Journalists were beaten and arrested by police operatives at the venue of the pro-democracy rally organised in Lagos on March 3, 1998. The rally was scheduled to begin at 3.00 pm but a large contingent of heavily armed policemen had taken positions at the Yaba, Lagos, venue of the rally in the early hours of the day. Their mission was to prevent the rally from holding. The first batch of journalists who arrived the venue at about 11.00 a.m to report activities preceeding the event were arrested by the police. Another batch had a raw deal during the rally proper in the afternoon. The police attacked the organisers, participants, and journalists. Journalists affected in the day's violations are: Yusuf Olaniyonu, ThisDay newspaper (Arrested); Sunday Ode, New Nigerian newspaper (Beaten & Arrested); Emmanuel Ogunyale, Photojournalist, Nigerian Tribune (Beaten & Arrested); Mrs Yewande Oluchi, African Independent TV (Arrested); Kola Oshiyemi, Photojournalist, News Agency of Nigeria (Beaten & Arrested); Chukudi Nwabuko, ThisDay Newspaper (Arrested); Robert Kajo, ThisDay Newspaper (Arrested); Mustapha Isa, African Independent TV (Arrested); Bassey Udo, Post Express - (Arrested); Monday Emoni, Photo Editor, The News/TEMPO - Beaten, Camera Smashed. The television crew of the Degue Broadcasting Network (DBN) who attempted to interview some youths at the gathering had their camera damaged by the enraged security operatives. Those arrested were released the same day. POLICE DISRUPT DETAINEES' WIVES MEETING; SEAL OFF NUJ HOUSE A meeting of wives of political detainees and prisoners was disrupted by security agents on 7 March 1998. A team of 40 uniformed and plain cloth security operatives, were deployed to the premises of Excellence Hotel, in the Ogba district of mainland Lagos, venue of the meeting. They laid siege on the night before and sealed off the premises early in the morning. When the organisers and participants arrived, the stern-looking operatives, brandishing riffles and pistols, prevented them from entering the meeting venue and ordered them off the premises. The meeting, organised by the Free Beko Kuti Campaign Committee was to discuss the women's plight and strategies for coping with the incarceration of their husbands. The committee however reported that an alternative venue was hurriedly organised and the workshop was held. In attendance were Mrs Arit Igiebor (wife of exiled Editor-in-Chief of TELL magazine, Nosa Igiebor), Mrs. Esther Kokori (wife of detained Oil Workers' Union Secretary Frank Kokori), Mrs. Chinata Nwite (wife of detained Senator Polycarp Nwite), Mrs. J.A Ajayi (wife of Col. E.A. Ajayi, one of the military officers imprisoned over the alleged 1995 Coup), Mrs Osifo-Whiskey (wife of detained TELL magazine managing editor). Others were Mrs Bunmi Ajibade (wife of Kunle Ajibade, imprisoned editor of The News), and Miss Nike Ransome-Kuti, ( daughter of jailed Dr. Beko Ransome-Kuti) and others. Similarly, a press conference called by the Youth Rights Campaign to highlight the plight of student's activities the Nigerian higher institutions scheduled to hold at the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) Press Centre, Somolu, Lagos on 8 March, 1998 was disrupted by armed policemen who sealed off the venue. ONDO GOVERNMENT REINSTATES TV BOSSES The assaulted and suspended General Manager of the Ondo State Television (ODTV), Mrs. Dunni Fagbayibo, and the Director of Finance Administration, Mr. Tunde Yusuff, have been recalled, following the acceptance by the State Executive Council of the interim report of the probe panel set up by the government to investigate the alleged assault meted on them February 1998. The secretary to the State Government, Prince Fioye Bajowa, was directed to issue a letter lifting the suspension order on the two officers in the wake of the crisis triggered off by the non-payment of allowance to a youth corps member who is related to the driver of the state Administrator, Navy Cdr. Anthony Onyearugbulem. Addressing newsmen after a meeting of the the state executive council, the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Olurotimi Akeredolu, said the panel, made up of four members and headed by the Commanding Officer, 323 Air Defence Artillery Brigade, Akure, Lt.-colonel T.E Dong, accepted the report that the corps member's stipend was not paid as at time of the incident. He said that there was evidence that the Administrator's driver was not responsible for the alleged assault but a soldier who did not recognise Mrs. Fagbayibo. The soldier, he said, was one of those newly posted to the Guard House, which is a restricted area, saying the assault actually took place in the Guard House and not the Administrator's office. According to him, Cdr. Onyearugbulem summoned all the parties into his office, listened to them and threatened to deal with any one found guilty. Following the executive council's decision, the two officers resumed work on March 5. MURDERED JOURNALIST BURIED, POLICE ARREST 3 SUSPECTS Journalists from all over the country March, 1998 in Abeokuta, Ogun State bid farewell to the late Tunde Oladepo who was shot dead by unidentified gunmen on Thursday 26 February, 1998. At his lying-in-state at the Abeokuta Golf Club (of which he was a member) and the Ogun State NUJ Press Centre, virtually everyone present wept. His widow, Shola, collapsed when she saw her late husband's body but was quickly revived by friends. Oladepo is survived by both parents, brothers, sisters and two daughters aged three years and eight months respectively. He was buried in his house in Ibadan later Oyo State in the day. Meanwhile, the Ogun State Police Command claims it has arrested three persons in connection with the killing of Mr. Tunde Oladepo. The arrest on Tuesday 3 March 1998 was confirmed by the state commissioner of police, Mr. Ogbonna Onowo. The commissioner claimed that the suspects are in detention, but "because of the traumas the widow is going through, we don't want to call her immediately to come and identify them; we will invite her to come and identify if any one of them (suspects) is among those who killed her husband" PRIVATE BROADCASTING STATIONS MAY LOSE LICENSES Radio, television and satellite redistribution licences granted some stations to operate broadcasting businesses in Nigeria may be withdrawn if certain criteria are not met by the stations before June. The licences granted five years ago will expire in June and the Nigerian Broadcasting Commission (NBC) has already commenced a process of licence review and renewal which may see some of the stations losing such licences. This was disclosed by the zonal director of the NBC for Lagos Zone, Mrs. Florence Didigu to newsmen in Lagos. Although the stations to be affected and criteria could not be ascertained, the commission earlier in the week concluded its first round of public forum on private television stations in the country after assessing DBN, Murhi International and ABG and moved to Ibadan where Galaxy Television and West Midlands Communication will be on focus. A circular from the office of the director-general of the commission, Dr. Tom Adaba and signed by the NBC's director of public affairs, said that the public were all invited to assess, make observations and ask the stations' chief executives questions on their programming mission, equity and fairness in news and political coverage, good taste and decency, ethical advertising, quality of transmission or other relevant issues. According to Mrs. Didigu, a very crucial state in this procedure is a public forum, where for the very first time in Africa, the viewing and listening public will be given the opportunity to participate to some extent in the renewal of broadcast licences. 13O WORKERS SACKED AS SUNRAY FOLDS UP Sunray Group of Newspapers has finally folded up its publications after more than six years of operations, throwing its remaining more than 130 staff, including 42 journalists into the labour market. The Group which took the Nigerian newspaper industry by storm in 1992, printing in full colour, an array of newspapers and magazines, started witnessing dwindling fortunes in 1995, a situation which gradually, but consistently worsened till last week, when the company folded up. Staff of the establishment,were issued "End of Service," letters Wednesday 4 March, 1998, finally sacking those who survived an earlier 60 per cent staff reduction of 1995 and 1996. The management invited staff to a meeting, where it was announced that the Sunray newspapers "could no longer be on the road for now". Staff of the outfit, owed many months salary arrears, were stunned last week when they got letters which stated that "management regrets to inform you that the Sunray Newspaper could no longer be on the road for now. As a result, your service to the company terminates with effect from March 2, 1998". Staff were advised to hand over all company property in their possession to their heads of department to facilitate the determination of their benefits in 90 days. In a swift reaction, the staff rejected the 90 days payment gap, claiming that the management had not been sincere with similar pledges in the past. The workers who addressed a press conference on the development on Friday said that "after suffering from a series of financial mismanagement and managerial ineptitude, the company finally died on March 3, 1998. "It should be noted at this juncture that we are not quarreling with the proprietors' decision to wind up their company, but we are extremely peeved by the callous way the action was carried out without regard to the welfare of the workers, most of whom have served the company since its inception in 1992," they stated. HERALD TO GO PLC If the proposal sent to Kwara State government is accepted, the state-owned newspaper, The Herald will soon become a public liability company. The Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director, Kwara State Printing, and Publishing Corporation (KPPC), publisher of the Herald titles, Mr. Raheem Adedoyin, disclosed this March 9, in Ilorin, Kwara State Capital, during a press conference. Mr. Adedoyin said that a proposal to this effect had been forwarded to the state administrator, Col. Peter Ogar. He explained that the era when the government could fully provide the needed funds for running a newspaper was gone, adding that "it was high time government allowed individuals and corporate bodies to take part in this". FEATURE CABLE AND SATELLITE BROADCASTING IN NIGERIA: TIME TO REVIEW THE LAW (1) by Stephen Kola-Balogun Cable and Satellite broadcasting is one of the major issues and challenges facing copyright protection in Nigeria today. It has been said that: "Satellites are playing an ever increasing part in intercontinental telecommunications. Far reaching changes are taking place in the distribution of pictures and sounds: technology is gradually bringing about a revolution in the transmission of ideas, whether of a political, informative, cultural, scientific or artistic nature. The use of communication satellites for programme transmission and exchange is changing the accepted approach to sound and television broadcasting and is giving rise to legal problems whose complexity is commensurate with the new possibilities for the conquest of space that have become available to mankind." Although these observations by Claude Masoury were made over twenty five years ago, the reality of this comments has just begun to dawn upon us in Nigeria. Only last year, Nigeria joined the rest of the world in watching one of the most spectacular and moving events of this century in the funeral of Princess Diana of Wales. The entire ceremony was beamed to the country live via CNN which millions of Nigerians regularly watched through the various cable and satellite operators spread across the length and breath of the country. Not to be outdone or left behind, many local television showed clips of the picture of the ceremony on their television stations later that same day. In many instances, those pictures were pirated off the cable and satellite operators. In the same vein, many leading cable and satellite operators are also being accused of infringing the copyright in the right of owners of works that are broadcast or rebroadcast on our television sets. Clearly this area of intellectual property law is becoming highly contentious. Before analysing how adequate Nigeria Copyright Law is in dealing with these issues, it is necesary for the benefit of those not familiar with this form of technology to give an explanation of what cable satellite broadcasting means and how it operates. A broadcast is defined by section 49 (1) of the Copyright Act 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as a sound or television by wireless telegraphy or wire or both or by satellite or cable programmes and includes re-broadcast. Cable programmes are defined by the same section as: Visual images sounds or other information sent by means of television system otherwise than by wireless telegraphy for reception: * at the two or more places (whether for simultaneous reception or at different times) in response to request by different users, or * for presentation to members of the public. Generally, although cable and satellite transmissions are complementary and widely seen as the same, they are different in a few material aspects. Under cable technology, instead of radio waves being freely transmitted over the air, signal are set along wide band cables direct to individual receivers. Previously, cable programmes were not regarded as broadcasts since they do not occur by wireless telegraphy. (Section 39 (1) of the Act which defines a broadcast as set out above appears to do away with this distinction by bringing cable programmes within the definition of a broadcast.) Initially broadcasts were essentially terrestrial. The development of satellite technology has brought about celestial broadcasting and opened up new avenues for bringing television and radio service to the home. There are 2 main forms of satellite broadcasting: Fixed Satellite Service (FSS). and *Direct Broadcasting by Satellite (DBS). Fixed Satellite Broadcasting is a radio-communication service via satellite between earth station-at specific point. The programme carrying signals are transmitted to the satellite and bounced back to an earth station and then normally distributed by a cable distributor to the recipient home. Examples of such cables distributors in Nigerian are Multichoice Nigeria Limited and Disc Engineering but to mention a few. Direct Broadcasting by Satellite occurs where signals are transmitted by the sender via the satellite directly for reception in individual homes without any intervening earth station. The recipient must of course have the equipment to receive the signal. Although rare in Nigeria, a few notable Nigerians are known to have the equipment which is characterised by large gigantic dishes. With ever improving technology, the distinction between FSS and DBS is becoming increasingly more blurred and difficult to sustain. Section 39(1) of the Act brings cable programmes under the ambit of copy right by including them within the definition of a broadcast, This is further accentuated by Section 7(1) of the Act which states that: Subject to this section, copyright in a broadcast shall be the exclusive right to control the doing in Nigeria of any of the following acts: The recording and the rebroadcasting of the whole or a substantial part of the broadcast. In other words, any local television station or satellite and cable operator who transmits or re-transmits a broadacst, must consider (if any) the copyright interests in the works contained in the broadcast and also the copyright in the broadcast itself. This section is not limited to television broadcasts alone and includes radio broadcasts and other forms of broadcast. Section 7(1) (a) refers to the whole or a substantial part of the broadcast. The rest as to what is substantial is a subjective one and may well have to be determined by the court. Section 7(3) of the Act states that the exception of fair dealings for research, private use, criticism and review, reporting of current broadcasting for educational purposes or for government use and the public interest, etc as contained in the second schedule to the Act shall apply to copyright in a broadcast, just as they apply to other literary artistic and musical works. It is my view, that the subsequent broadcast of the pictures of Diana's funeral for example falls into at least two of the above categories. Local television stations may also argue that a substantial part of broadcast was not used and as such there was no copyright infringement. This we have already noted will have to be determined subjectively by the courts. Ordinarily consent for the use of copyright works in a broadcast should be obtained before there is reception by the general public. This is further outlined in section 7 (1) (b) and (c). Section 7(1) (b) states that a copyright owner can control the communication to the public of the whole or a subtantial part of a television broadcast, either in its original form or in any form recognisably derived from the original: while section 7 (1) (c) states that a copyright owner of a broadcast can control the distribution to the public for commercial purposes of copies of the work, by way of rental, lease, hire, loan or similar arrangement. It should be noted that Section 39 (1) of the Acts defines "Communication to the public" as including in addition to any live performance or delivery, any mode of visual or acoustic presentation but does not include a broadcast or re-broadcast". Section 7(1) (b) and (c) are therefore not directly relevant to cable and satellite broadcasting. Of particular significance is section 7 (1) (a) which must be very carefully construed. For example, are the words recording and re-broadcasting as contained in Section 7 (1) (a) conjunctive? Assuming they are conjunctive, the provisions of section 7 (1) (a) would conveniently cover anyone who records off radio or television stations (whether terrestrial, cable or satellite) and then subsequently re-broadcasts the whole or a substantial part of that broadcast. If on the other hand, the prosivions of section 7(1) (a) are not to be regarded as conjunctive, then the issue that has to be considered is what happens where one person records a broadcast and another person re-broadcasts it. For example, a local broadcasting station like NTA may give out signals to a cable or satellite operator to transmit its broadcasts. The cable or satellite operator will usually respond to those signals by hooking on the local television station by re-broadcast in their programmes. In situations like this, the satellite operators do not record the local programmes themselves. This is done by the local television station. What the cable or satellite operators do, is re-broadcast such local programmes on their network when given the signal to go ahead. This could create legal problems. The owner of the copyright in a broadcast may not necessarily be the owner of the copyright in the works contained in the broadcast. The owner of the copyright in the works contained in the broadcast in most instances is the artist and he may feel aggrieved at the fact that his works are being re-broadcast on a television station terrestrial, cable or satellite without his consent. It would appear unwise for such an artist to institute an action against the broadcasting authority which rebroadcast his work i.e a cable or satellite operator without first joining the original broadcasting authority. On the other hand, the re-broadcasting authority may also argue that there is no contractual arrangement between them and the artist, or that in any case they were not aware of any reasonable ground for suspecting that all necessary consents had not been obtained. It is perhaps for these reasons that section 15 (2) and (3) of the Act provides useful solutions to these problems by stating as follows: 15 (2) Where an action for infringement of copyright brought by the copyright owner of an exclusive licensee relates to an infringement in respecting of which they have concurrent rights of action, the copyrights owner or the exclusive licensee may not, without the leave of court, proceed with the action unless the other is either joined as a plaintiff or added as defendant. 15 (3) Where in an action for infringement of copyright, it is proved or admitted that an infringement was committed but that at the time of the infringement the defendant was not aware and had no reasonable ground for suspecting that copyright subsisted in the work to which the action relates, the plaintiff shall not be entitled under this section to any damages against defendant in respect of the infringement, but shall be entitled to an account of profits in respect of the infrigement, whether or not any other relief is granted under this section. In certain specific instances, there is no copyright control in works contained in a lawful broadcast. It may be useful to note that the Act does not define a lawful broadcast and the easier interpretation would perhaps mean any broadcast that is not unlawful. Source: The Guardian, March 10, 1998
TO OUR DEAR READERS: Media Monitor is a dialogical project. We expect that its contents will elicit reactions from its readers. Consequently, you are all encouraged to share your feelings with one another on its pages. Letters not longer than 200 words marked for the attention of the Editor, Media Monitor, should be e-mailed to: ijc@linkserve.com.ng
MEDIA MONITOR IS PUBLISHED WEEKLY AND CIRCULATED WORLDWIDE BY INDEPENDENT JOURNALISM CENTRE (IJC), TEJUMOLA HOUSE, 1ST FLOOR, 24 OMOLE LAYOUT, NEW ISHERI ROAD, P.O.BOX 7808, LAGOS, NIGERIA. TEL/FAX 234-1-4924998; E-MAIL: ijc@linkserve.com.ng
Media Monitor