The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project and the Nigerian Guild of Editors have taken legal action against the National Broadcasting Commission over what they describe as “the arbitrary, unconstitutional, and unlawful ‘Formal Notice’, which threatens to sanction broadcast stations and presenters for allegedly ‘expressing personal opinions as facts, bullying or intimidating guests, or failing to maintain neutrality.”
The NBC had recently warned broadcast stations and on-air personalities of possible sanctions for what it termed ‘expressing personal opinions as facts’ or ‘bullying and intimidating guests’, saying it had observed “a sustained increase in breaches of the 6th Edition of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code across news, current affairs, and political programmes.”
In the suit marked FHC/L/CS/854/2026, filed last Friday at the Federal High Court in Lagos, SERAP and NGE are asking the court “to determine whether the various provisions of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code relied upon by the NBC to threaten broadcasters are inconsistent with the Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended) and the country’s international human rights obligations.”
They are further seeking “a declaration that the provisions of the 6th Edition of the Broadcasting Code used by the NBC are vague and overly broad and constitute a fundamental breach of freedom of expression and media freedom guaranteed by the Nigerian Constitution and international human rights standards.”
The organisations are also praying the court for “an order of interim injunction restraining the NBC, its agents or privies, whether jointly or severally or any other authority from imposing sanctions on broadcast stations and presenters based on the patently unlawful provisions of the 6th Edition of the Broadcasting Code, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice filed simultaneously in this suit.”
According to the plaintiffs, “Unless the reliefs sought are granted, the NBC will continue to use the provisions of the 6th Edition of the Broadcasting Code to threaten and sanction broadcast stations and presenters solely for carrying out their constitutional responsibilities and exercising their rights.”
They also maintained that “The Nigerian Constitution and international human rights law protect both the absolute right to hold opinions and the qualified right to express ideas of all kinds. Journalistic opinion is protected expression.”
Human rights lawyer, Mr Femi Falana (SAN), is expected to lead a team of senior advocates representing SERAP and NGE in the matter.
In the originating processes, including the originating summons, motion ex parte, motion on notice, and affidavit of urgency—the applicants argued in part that: “Value judgments are not susceptible of proof and enjoy heightened protection. Journalism necessarily includes analysis and commentary.”
They added that “The right to impart ideas necessarily includes opinions, commentary, and analysis. A blanket prohibition on the expression of ‘personal opinions by anchors and presenters’ amounts to an impermissible restriction to this right.”
The plaintiffs further submitted that “Journalists are entitled to express their opinions as a matter of professional standard, including commentary and analytical expression, which lie at the very core of journalistic practice and democratic discourse.”
On constitutional supremacy, they argued that “The Nigerian Constitution is the supreme law, and any law that is inconsistent with it is null and void. The Nigeria Broadcasting Code, as subsidiary legislation, cannot override constitutional rights or exceed its enabling Act. Provisions that are vague and overly broad unlawfully restrict freedom of expression and must be struck down.”
They also referenced international law, stating that “Under Article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a State may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform international treaties, including the human rights treaties to which Nigeria is a state party.”
Further arguments in the suit include: “The Nigeria Broadcasting Code, as subsidiary legislation, is subject to the Nigerian Constitution and cannot override fundamental rights. Its vague and overly broad provisions grant excessive discretion and undermine freedom of expression. Such impermissible restrictions are unconstitutional and should be struck down.”
“The NBC’s claim of a ‘crisis of anchor and presenter professionalism’ as justification for restrictive measures is legally insufficient and cannot be a permissible ground of derogation from freedom of expression. Any limitation on the rights must be reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.”
“The blanket prohibition imposed by Section 1.10.3 of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code, which prohibits presenters from expressing opinions. This amounts to prior restraint that impermissibly excludes commentary, analysis, and value judgments—the core of journalism and democratic discourse.”
They also noted that “Section 1.10.3 amounts to a form of prior censorship or restraint. Such a blanket restriction fails the legal tests of legality, necessity and proportionality required in a democratic society.”
They said, “The NBC’s reliance on multiple vague provisions of the Broadcasting Code to classify a wide range of presenter conduct as ‘Class B breaches’ attracting sanctions is contrary to the Nigerian Constitution and international human rights law.”
They further cited constitutional and treaty protections: “Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Nigeria is a state party guarantee the right to ‘receive and impart ideas and information without interference.”
On regulatory limits, they stated that “Under the Nigerian Constitution and international human rights law, restrictions must pursue a legitimate aim and be necessary and proportionate. The NBC’s reliance on an undefined and subjective standard of ‘professionalism’ introduces vagueness and opens the door to arbitrary enforcement.”
They also warned that “Ahead of the 2027 general elections, the NBC’s Formal Notice undermines Nigerians’ democratic rights to receive diverse information, hear competing political viewpoints, and engage in open debate.”
Among other submissions, the suit contends that “The absence of clear definitions distinguishing fact from opinion renders the provision prone to arbitrary application, thereby creating a chilling effect on legitimate journalistic expression and debate.”
Finally, SERAP and NGE are asking the court for several reliefs, including, A DECLARATION that Sections 1.10.3, 3.3.1(b), 3.4.1(b), 5.3.3(b), 3.1.1, 3.11.1(a), 5.4.1(f), 3.11.1(b), and 5.5.1(b) of the 6th Edition of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code, by reason of their vagueness and imprecision, constitute a breach of the rights to freedom of expression and opinion and access to information as guaranteed by the Nigerian Constitution and the country’s international human rights obligations.
A DECLARATION that Sections 1.10.3, 3.3.1(b), 3.4.1(b), 5.3.3(b), 3.1.1, 3.11.1(a), 5.4.1(f), 3.11.1(b), and 5.5.1(b) of the 6th Edition of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code are overbroad, vague and fail to provide citizens and broadcasting stations with sufficient notice of what constitutes a breach, and are consequently unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void.
AN ORDER of the Court nullifying and setting aside Sections 1.10.3, 3.3.1(b), 3.4.1(b), 5.3.3(b), 3.1.1, 3.11.1(a), 5.4.1(f), 3.11.1(b), and 5.5.1(b) of the 6th Edition of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code for being inconsistent with, and amounting to a fundamental breach of the rights to freedom of expression and opinion, and access to information as guaranteed under the Nigerian Constitution, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
AN ORDER OF PERPETUAL INJUNCTION restraining the NBC, whether jointly or severally or any other authority, person or group of persons from enforcing, imposing sanctions, or levying fines on broadcast stations and presenters based on the provisions of Sections 1.10.3, 3.3.1(b), 3.4.1(b), 5.3.3(b), 3.1.1, 3.11.1(a), 5.4.1(f), 3.11.1(b), and 5.5.1(b) of the 6th Edition of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code.
No date has been fixed for the hearing of the interim application and the substantive suit.
