BEVERLY HILLS, January 28, (THEWILL) – The Citizens Advocacy for Social and Economic Rights, CASER, has written to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, warning that the move by the House to pass into law a bill for the live coverage of court proceedings may be a waste of legislative time, as the issue is within the purview of the judiciary.
CASER regretted that the motion sponsored by Daniel Reyneiju (PDP-Delta), and titled, ‘A Bill for an Act to provide for media coverage of court proceedings and for other related matters’ has passed second reading without a recognition of the work already carried out in that regard by the group, which has reached “an advanced stage”.
THEWILL on Friday obtained the letter tittled: Second Reading Of The Bill Seeking Live Broadcast Of Court Proceedings In Nigeria: The Need To Recognise And Consider The Ongoing Work Of Civil Society Organizations, CSOs, The Nigerian Media and The National Judicial Council, NJC.
In the letter, CASER’s Executive-Director, Frank Tietie said the group was “very much aware of the powers of the National Assembly to make laws on such issues before it decided to approach the Judiciary to consider the approval of live media broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria. CASER realises that in the Nigerian context, it is more of a judicial issue than a legislative one”.
Tietie argued that while the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, Federal High Court, State High Courts, Sharia/Customary Courts of Appeal, and the National Industrial Court are all creations of Nigeria’s Constitution, they all have heads who are empowered by law to make rules of procedure  for the proper dispensation of justice.
Insisting that the bill is clearly outside the purview of the legislature going by the principle embedded in the legal maxim of delegatus non potest delagare, CASER pointed out that while Section 46 of the Constitution empowered the Chief Justice of Nigeria to make rules for the enforcement of fundamental rights in Nigeria, the National Assembly would require an amendment of the Constitution to takeover that function from the CJN.
Stating that Reyneiju may have failed to conduct deep research on the issue to stumble on the work it has already done on the subject-matter, the civil society organisation warned that the lawmaker may through the said bill mislead the Green Chamber into passing the bill in a constitutional matter which courts have already been empowered to make rules on.
Tietie recounted how CASER initiated the call for the live broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria as early as last February by urging the then CJN and other heads of courts to give directions in that regard. It added that this move excited the main stream Nigerian media which accorded prominence to the initiative as a news item.
The letter reads in part, “In the wake of the arrest of allegedly corrupt judges by the Department of State Services (DSS), in October, 2016, CASER renewed its call to the Chief Justice of Nigeria to allow live broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria.
“CASER engaged legal experts like Chief Joshua Alobo and Kemi Okonyodo to give enlightened perspectives on the issue which was given prominent broadcast on the syndicated O & M Sunday Show.
“Frank Tietie, Executive Director of CASER also engaged in very long phone conversations, on the issue with the erudite Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, the former chairman of the National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria.
“Odinkalu called for more research on the subject matter, raised quite a lot of salient legal issues and held a cautious stance given his direct involvement in the emergence of the South African experience with attendant legal issues regarding cameras in court as was witnessed in the recent trial of Oscar Pistorius.
“CASER has done quite a lot of research on the subject matter and had conducted comparative analysis of jurisdictions such as that of the  United Kingdom, United States,  Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and India.
“The advocacy for live broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria received a major boost after the National Judicial Council agreed to consider the request by CASER for live cameras in court at its meeting which held on the 2nd and 3rd of November, 2016 in Abuja.
“On the 11th of November, 2016, the NJC informed CASER that it has considered the request and that it would require the appropriate technology to make it work in Nigeria. See attached letters from the National Judicial Council to CASER.
“Thus, the work to make the live broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria a reality has reached some advanced stage. CASER has contacted broadcast technology service providers both within and outside Nigeria and also plans to consult Prof. Solomon Ukhuegbe in preparation to submit a broader proposal to the National Judicial Council after it raised the issue of technology as a barrier.
“CASER welcomes the news that the bill sponsored by Hon. Daniel Reyneiju (PDP-Delta) , titled, “A Bill for an Act to provide for media coverage of court proceedings and for other related matters’’ has passed second reading.”
“CASER, by its earlier letters to the NJC considered that there already exist constitutional and statutory provisions that allow live broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria but such is at the discretion of the heads of courts through issuance of practice directions or at the discretion of any judge who wishes the proceedings of the court he or she presides over to be broadcast live.
“The House of Representatives must avoid being unnecessarily hasty in the multiplication of legislation where what is required are informed policy directions by an independent arm of government which operates at the different levels of government.
“The bill if passed into law without the active consideration of the existing powers of the Judiciary would be defeatist from the outset as it would suffer serious frustration by the Judiciary which guards its independence jealously, realising it as the bastion of justice.
“It is this wisdom that informed CASER to engage of the Nigerian Judiciary much earlier in seeking the approval of live media broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria.
“In a matter where a motion in the House of Representatives would obviously achieve so much result by persuasion, it would amount to a waste of precious legislative time and resources to engage in active law making where copious provisions have already been made in Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria together with other statutes.
“The House of Representatives must therefore consider and adopt an engagement process with the Judiciary, the Nigerian CSO community and the media in order to realise the positive goals of live media broadcast of court proceedings in Nigeria.”
