In today’s outing it will be less grammar and little analysis. The style will be to put out the issues involved and allow them make the points themselves. Today’s topic should not be an issue at all and the reason is a very simple one: the two near identical subjects have remained front burner matters since we became an independent society about 60 years ago. It has assumed the nature of a reccurring decimal which shouldn’t be if ours were a society with serious leadership class.
Freedom of speech and of the press are issues of progressive development that should have been sorted out in a question of months not years, but in our case it is taking decades and yet answers look far flung if not elusive. See why this is painful, recent history is not only clear but very emphatic about the fact that any determined, visionary and focused people can build a great nation, one that has something new to contribute to civilization in under 30 years. So it is a misplacement of priority for us to be engaged in at this point in the life of our society, to be talking and even raising undue controversy over freedom of speech and press freedom.
The speed of our human and material development ought to go at a very fast pace, if we meant business. By now we ought to find ourselves among the developed nations. More than the others we have very favourable comparative advantages in many areas of the key factors of development. Today, developed worlds are still luring people from under developed economies under different guises to come and settle in their highly stratified countries just to beef up population so as to have enough cheap manpower, something God in his benevolence gave us in abundance free of charge. Add to this the fact we have benefit of multiple examples to chose from and then of course technology. Yet, we wobble and embrace the stumbling that must go with such a foolish choice.
Our detestable fate is compounded by those among us who insist we can›t make out anything reasonable for ourselves via direct deep thinking, much less pulling through discovered concepts into reality except we walk through the path of direct experience. This group have some points and some truths but not the bigger truth. Drawing from points made earlier what we require and still seriously in need of today are the bigger truths because as already stated in this piece we have enough examples to draw from, enough to give strength to us and ability to put our resources quickly together and to fly. We don’t need to reinvent the wheels to build ourselves aeroplanes or cities well designed and fully lit up to the joy of ourselves and the world. United Arab Emirates hasn’t invented anything new yet within a very short time leaders there defied the odds, to turn very hostile desert environment into one of the world’s most inviting and thriving destination. It was possible because the leadership chose to quickly deal with simple matters so all attention could be on very major issues. Serious, creative societies in modern times rested matters of civil rights very early in the life of their countries.
Controversy over freedom of speech also known as freedom of expression and freedom of the press have been with us all along. At a point the leadership class thought even human thoughts could be regulated. Rereading history recently I couldn’t tell why the central government at some point of our national life opted to maltreat and even send to jail human rights campaigners like late Chief Gani Fawehimi for just asking that good governance be entrenched in our society. From that time in the 80s till today the subjects in question and our governments’ reactions have remained contentious. The people in power and authority don’t want the people to talk about their state and what the leadership they put in place to organize society and give them better life make of the assignment.
Members leadership class we allowed to be created here have on their own established a model for themselves. This model sees public service as private enterprise where the leaders are founders and creators hence above scrutiny. It is in that sense they loathe public scrutiny of any kind. If they have the power no one should speak about anybody in power and authority, but since our society is not an isolated case, they fear a backlash. It is the fear factor that motivates a section of the leadership class to offer to make concessions in the form that the people could be given some space to talk but if they must be allowed then what they voice out must be pleasing or else. This is the mentality that has turned what is a very simple matter to a very complex one.
As already observed these issues ought not to be vital matters at this point in our national development, and the reason is simple: the importance of those freedoms are so cardinal to developing a great society that it ought to have been dealt with and rested forever but it has remained an issue to the point that in recent timea the contention is turning monstrous. It is terrible that we created a trend in which everything, every issue no matter the seriousness in our governance system must be subject of nasty politics. It is making good development very difficult and leaving us with unintended negative consequences. Last week an opposition figure was jailed for one year for abusing the President and Secretary to Government of the Federation. Two weeks ago many journalists who should cover the trial of Nnamdi Kanu, a self-determination crusader in Abuja, couldn’t on account that the authorities brazenly chose to be media selective. Previously, some broadcast media had been fined N5 million for giving balance to their stories. The government felt one side should not be heard.
As you read this, this government is at loggerheads with the media over attempt to rework the Nigeria Press Organization, the media Ombudsman. Enemies of sound development want to create a structure or organogram that will subordinate control and punishment of media to a government official. This tango is regardless of the fact that media organizations have a case on the issue pending at the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land. At the National Assembly where serious attention should be given to security and economic development matters, elected representatives found time to propose a bill that will end up criminalizing freedom of expression and freedom of the press. Media practitioners should be jailed where their information is incorrect. You hear that and you are left to wonder why reasonable people designed media and public relations units in various organizations. You wonder if those embracing such attempt don›t know about right of reply. What are laws on libel and sedition doing in our laws books?
Talks don›t kill, same for written words. They may in some instances irritate but overall they precipitate positive changes. It is especially so in situations where there exists a leadership imbued with capacity to reason and react appropriately to emerging matters. Public reactions no matter the form can never turn a distraction where the leaders lead the people to devote all attention on main issues. No matter the talk people won’t be provoked to fight if they know they will get dignified employment which will make living a great song. It is the vanguards that cash in on circumstances to instigate conflicts otherwise it is very difficult for ordinary people to rise and take a go at each other. Freedom of expression and free press in its pure essence seeks to take away the instinct to take a recourse to self-help.
Talking or voicing out is a tranquilizer. People are more likely to return to a state of calm after they ventilate themselves than they will be towards violence. Neglect is the root of conflicts, we know this to be the truth. If those pushing for draconian laws knew this elementary lesson they will spare us the bad attitude of going in circles round simple matters. It does us no good; if anything, it diminishes us in the eyes of the world. We must view current attempts with great trepidation.
Benjamin Franklin taught a great lesson to which I subscribe: “Leaders who desire to take away liberty available to the people begin by subduing freedom of speech and of the press.” Christopher Dodd comes with much wider perspective: “When the public right to know is threatened and when the right to free speech and press freedom are at risk, all the other liberties we hold dear become endangered.” Today, all around us, citizens can shoot at and killed and nobody will feel obliged to ask an ordinary question. Who wants this state of nature? Certainly not me!
Constitution did well when it enshrined those freedoms. Every effort after this should be to expand the frontiers of freedom available to the public not to seek to abridge it. If activism were in place any such law should be ultra vires. Musical icon Fela was right when he sang “they want “dash” (gift) me human rights.” Those freedoms are in the group of inalienable rights that are naturally acquired. Anybody in society that tampers with it pays dearly. It is more so if our pathway to development is democracy. In a true democracy, government and leaders should fear the people. If by chance there is a situation the people fear the leaders and government, then society will be stunted and a bigger conflagration will be inevitable.
The latter is with us already and it is not a pleasant situation. Everything suggests that the attempt to gag the people and the press is an ethnic agenda. It is in our interest to ask those pushing this path of infamy to stop because it will offer no one any good. It will be great if they take in the message of Harold Lasswell who taught the world that, “open interplay of the people and their government is the distinguishing mark of popular rule.” You can’t have this if we tell the people shut up. They will revolt.