Connect with us

Broadcasting

DSO: Lawyers Tear Whitepaper Apart, Say It Lacks Force of Law

Published

on

Prof. Armstrong Idachaba, director general, NBC
Kindly share this post

Lawyers have faulted the recent directive by the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) on the abolition of self-carriage status by broadcast entities.

DSO: Lawyers Tear Whitepaper Apart, Say It Lacks Force of Law

They said the 2014 Digital Switch Over (DSO) Whitepaper the commission relied on to issue is an expired document and lacks the force of law.

Ahead of the commencement of the second phase of the DSO programme, which has proceeded in fits and starts, including two unmet deadlines, the NBC recently directed digital terrestrial television operators to reconfigure their transmission set-ups and transfer their carriage to either ITS or Pinnacle Communications Limited, the licensed signal distributors, with immediate effect.

The NBC, in a letter signed by Dr Armstrong Idachaba, acting director-general, said its directive on abolition of self-carriage is Section 10 of the 2014 DSO Whitepaper, which it said prescribes the splitting of broadcasting activities into content distribution and signal distribution. The commission stated that with the split, a single broadcaster can no longer combine the functions of content carriage and signal distribution.

Reacting to the directive, Marian Igbi, Lagos-based lawyer, said the NBC erred by presenting the DSO Whitepaper as a document with the same force as a law.

Advertisement

She contended that the Whitepaper, issued in 2014, can no longer be deemed as valid, given that two editions of the National Broadcasting Code, a subsidiary legislation on broadcasting, were issued after it.

“It is important to realise that the 5th and 6th editions of the National Broadcasting Code came into effect after the Whitepaper.

“The Whitepaper the NBC relies on as empowering it to issue the directive gave no effect to the document’s recommendations. As a matter of fact, it could not have given any effect to it in view of the fact that the National Assembly has not yet amended the NBC Act,” she argued.

Speaking in similar vein, Maxwell Ogbeche, another lawyer, noted that a Whitepaper is simply a distillation to supply an analysis of a particular subject, including new policy frameworks, but is not the equivalent of a law.

“Whitepapers are statements of policy directions. They are not laws and their recommendations have to be worked into actual legislations to have any binding legal effect. In this case, the recommendations of the DSO Whitepaper remain unknown to the NBC Act and the Broadcast Code, both of which are the bodies of laws regulating broadcasting in Nigeria. There is no other legislation,” he said.

Advertisement

Also speaking, Timothy Shaba, lawyer and former broadcaster, argued that the NBC appears muddled.

According to him, the NBC Act and National Broadcast Code are clear on broadcasting functions that require licence issuance, saying DTT operators at which the Commission’s directive is aimed have valid authority to distribute the signals, comprising DTT service.

“The licence issued to DTT service providers isn’t the same as a signal distribution licence because it permits them to carry out their core business of providing subscription television services to Nigerians.

“Signal distributors’ core business is the provision of signal distribution services to broadcasters licensed by the government. They do not provide that service to the general public,” he explained.

 

Advertisement

 

 

Kindly share this post

Nigeria CommunicationsWeek believes that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. So since 2007, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and how they affect lives.

Broadcasting

BON Establishes Six Ad Hoc Committees to Modernize Broadcasting

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Broadcasting Organization of Nigeria (BON) has established six committees to help strengthen and modernize the country’s broadcasting industry.

The committees will focus on content creation, skills development, digital transformation, sustainability, policy and commercial opportunities

The initiative aims to support industry growth and improve collaboration between broadcasters, regulators and media experts

The official launch recently, was led by Tony Akiotu, president, BON and attended by media professionals, program directors, former journalists and heads of specialized media organizations.

The event brought together several prominent figures in Nigeria’s media industry, including veteran broadcaster and trainer Bimbo Oloyede, Tony Uyah of M4S TV, Kingsley Uranta of Channels Television, Ismael Sani of Platinum TV and Ibrahim Shehu of Trust TV.

Advertisement

Together, they are expected to help drive innovation and support the growth of Nigeria’s broadcasting sector.

According to Akiotu, the committees are intended both to help shape industry policy and to provide a forum for dialogue between BON and broadcasting experts.

Akiotu said the ad hoc committees were intended to strengthen BON’s work and ensure that the umbrella body for Nigeria’s broadcasters played a more direct and meaningful role in developing the country’s broadcasting sector.

The six committees reflect the sector’s main priorities. The first focuses on collaboration and innovation to promote content creation.

The second is dedicated to training and talent development, while the third focuses on industry sustainability by improving the sector’s long-term financial viability.

Advertisement

A fourth committee will focus on digital transformation and work with the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) on regulatory issues.

The remaining two committees will oversee public policy advocacy and the development of sports and commercial rights to help broadcasters increase revenue and attract more investment. Together, the committees are expected to guide BON’s efforts to modernize and strengthen Nigeria’s broadcasting industry.

The committees, chaired by members of BON’s General Assembly and supported by the organization’s Secretariat, have an initial 12-month mandate that may be renewed if necessary.

They are required to submit a progress report within three months and implement approved recommendations within the following six months.

The arrangement is intended to ensure close oversight and the timely implementation of their work.

Advertisement

Akiotu also reminded committee members that Nigeria pioneered television broadcasting in Africa and urged them to carry out their work with greater effectiveness and efficiency.

Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Broadcasting

NELFUND Investigates 34 Universities Over Students’ Missing Tuition Refunds

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) says it is investigating about 34 tertiary institutions over allegations that they failed to refund students whose tuition fees were paid twice under the Federal Government’s student loan scheme.

The Managing Director of NELFUND, Mr Akintunde Sawyerr, disclosed this during an interview on Arise Television.

Sawyerr said the agency had deployed a five-member investigative team, including operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and internal auditors, to examine the allegations.

According to him, the investigation was prompted by numerous complaints received from affected students.

“As of right now, there are 34 institutions that we are looking at closely with respect to this issue,” he said.

Advertisement

Sawyerr explained that the double payment issue arose because President Bola Tinubu directed that the student loan scheme commence in the middle of an academic session instead of at the beginning.

He said the decision compelled many students to pay their tuition fees to meet registration deadlines while awaiting approval of their loan applications.

“What happened is that a lot of schools got double payment; some from the students and some from us,” he said.

“The refund process is entirely out of our hands. It is the recipient of the double payments that is obliged to make refunds to the students.”

The NELFUND boss noted that many students had borrowed money from family members, friends and other sources to pay their tuition with the expectation of receiving refunds once the loans were disbursed.

Advertisement

He said while some institutions had promptly refunded affected students, others had failed to do so.

“Some have been very good at this. Others haven’t been so good at it,” Sawyerr said.

“I reserve judgement on the intentionality around it because, for some of them, they just didn’t have the process to make refunds.”

Sawyerr disclosed that NELFUND was exploring a tokenised payment system that would enable students to authorise tuition payments directly to their institutions, thereby reducing the likelihood of duplicate payments.

He said the agency deliberately chose not to disburse tuition loans directly to students to minimise the risk of fund diversion.

Advertisement

“Paying the funds to the students could really lead to the temptation for them to divert and do other things,” he said.

The managing director, however, acknowledged that NELFUND lacked the statutory powers to compel institutions to refund students or prosecute officials found culpable.

He added that many frustrated students had submitted complaints not only to NELFUND but also to anti-corruption agencies, including the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

Sawyerr also expressed concern over increases in tuition fees by some institutions following the introduction of the student loan scheme.

He said NELFUND had declined to pay institutions that increased their tuition fees beyond acceptable levels.

Advertisement

“Some schools, because they get paid easily, started to put up their fees. We refused, point blank, to pay institutions who had hiked their fees beyond a certain level,” he said.

He reaffirmed the agency’s commitment to investigating every reported irregularity and strengthening the implementation of the student loan programme through continuous monitoring and internal reviews.

Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Broadcasting

Obi, NDC Presidential Candidate Faces N50Bn Defamation Claim over Alleged Podcast Remark

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Abayomi Arabambi, national vice chairman (South-West) of the Labour Party, has demanded a public apology, a retraction, and N50 billion in damages from Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), over an alleged defamatory statement made during a podcast interview.

Obi, NDC Presidential Candidate Faces N50Bn Defamation Claim over Alleged Podcast Remark

The demand was contained in a letter issued by the law firm Neplus Ultra Attorneys and signed by Anderson U. Asemota, Peter O. Asimegbe, and Stanley C. Eziefulle on behalf of Arabambi.

According to the letter, the legal dispute arose from comments allegedly made by Obi during the interview, where he reportedly stated that Arabambi “does not have an address.”

Arabambi’s legal team described the statement as false, malicious, and defamatory, arguing that it portrayed their client as a faceless individual without legitimacy, credibility, or standing in public life.

The lawyers further claimed that the interview was widely circulated on television stations and digital platforms, exposing Arabambi to public ridicule and damaging his reputation.

Advertisement

“Our client has had a known residential and business address, maintains professional and political affiliations within Nigeria, and has never been a person whose whereabouts or identity were unknown,” the letter stated.

The legal team maintained that the alleged publication caused embarrassment and harmed Arabambi’s public image and political standing.

As part of their demands, the lawyers called for an unreserved public apology to be aired on national television, published on Obi’s verified social media platforms, and carried as full-page apologies in national newspapers.

They also demanded the payment of N50 billion as compensation for the alleged injury to Arabambi’s reputation, dignity, political standing, and public image.

 

Advertisement

Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending