Since the commencement of the trial of former Kaduna state Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, for alleged corruption at the Federal High court, Kaduna, the media have been shut out of the coverage. Journalists now depend on briefings from counsel to both sides after each proceedings. This is patently wrong.
The grundnorm, that is, the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) unequivocally states that judicial proceedings are open to the public, including the me- dia. No special permission needs be sought by journalists before covering court’s proceedings.
Any Judge or Magistrate that prevents a journalist from accessing his/her court is acting unconstitutionally, except the matter before the court falls under exceptions as stated in the constitution where the press could be prevented from coverage as provided for in Section 36(4)(a)(b). Similarly, no security agency has the power to prevent journalists coverage of judicial proceedings, except as stated in the constitution.
Section 36(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) states:
“The proceedings of a court or the proceeding of any tribunal relating to the matters mentioned in subsection (1) of this section including the announcement of the decisions of the court or tribunal shall be held in public.
(4) Whenever any person is charged with a criminal offence, he shall, unless the charge is withdrawn, be entitled to a fair hearing in public within a reasonable time by a court or tribunal:
Provided that – (a) a court or such a tribunal may exclude from its proceedings persons other than the parties thereto or their legal practitioners in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality, the welfare of persons who have not attained the age of eighteen years, the protection of the private lives of the parties or to such extent as it may consider necessary by reason of special circumstance in which publicity would be contrary to the interest of justice;
(b) if any proceedings before a court or such a tribunal, a Minister of the Government of the Federation or a Commissioner of the Government of a State satisfies a court or tribunal that it would not be in the public interest for any matter to be publicly disclosed, the court or tri- bunal shall make arrangements for evidence relating to the matter to be heard in private and shall take such other action as may be necessary or expedient to prevent the disclosure of the matter.
None of the exceptions in sections 4(a)(b) are relevant here in respect of El-Rufai’s trial.
Similarly, the court, pursuant to the provisions of section 254 of the 1999 constitution (as amended) may make a practice direction to prevent the media from covering terrorism-related trials.
This was done in 2022 at the wake of the trial of Nnamdi Kanu, the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB),when the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, John Tsoho issued similar directive which stated inter alia:
“Proceedings of offences of terrorism, subject to the provisions of section 232 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 and section 34 of the Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011 (as amended), shall be held in camera or as may be ordered by the court.”
The rule makes provision to exclude “any person other than the parties and their legal representatives from terrorism proceedings. The coverage of proceedings under these Practice Directions is strictly prohibited, save as may be directed by the court.”
Therefore, save for the exception made in section 254 of the constitution, a journalist is at liberty to cover judicial proceedings and such reporter does not need any special permission from the judge or security agencies. El-Rufai is facing corruption charges, like any former public official, not terrorism charges.
The relevant media bodies need to take this up with the court in Kaduna.
