The Federal High Court in Lagos has stopped the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) from “using its recently issued ‘Formal Notice’ to threaten, sanction or punish broadcast stations and presenters for expressing personal opinions as facts, bullying or intimidating guests, or failing to maintain neutrality.”
Hon Justice Daniel Osiagor on Monday granted an order of interim injunction following arguments on an ex parte motion filed by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE).
The case was argued on behalf of SERAP and NGE by their lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN.
The ruling follows a lawsuit filed by SERAP and NGE challenging what they described as “an arbitrary and unlawful attempt by the NBC to sanction broadcasters for allegedly expressing personal opinions as facts” , “bullying or intimidating guests,” or failing to maintain “neutrality.”
SERAP and NGE had, in the lawsuit, asked 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 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the country’s international human rights obligations.”
In a joint statement on Monday, SERAP and NGE “welcome the landmark ruling, which granted an interim injunction restraining the NBC from enforcing controversial provisions of the Nigerian Broadcasting Code used to threaten broadcasters and presenters.”
SERAP and NGE said: “This is a significant victory for freedom of expression, media freedom, and the rule of law in Nigeria. The court’s decision to restrain the NBC from enforcing these vague and overly broad provisions affirms the fundamental principle that regulatory powers must be exercised within constitutional limits.”
In his ruling, Justice Osiagor ordered that the NBC, its officers, agents, or any affiliated persons be restrained from imposing sanctions, fines, or other penalties on broadcasting stations based on several contested provisions of the 6th Edition of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
The case has been adjourned to June 1, 2026 for the hearing of the motion on Notice.
In the lawsuit, SERAP and NGE are arguing that “the provisions relied upon by the NBC are inconsistent with Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 (as amended), which guarantees the right to freedom of expression, including the right to receive and impart information and ideas without interference.”
According to SERAP and NGE, “the right to freedom of expression includes not only factual reporting but also opinions, commentary, and analysis. Journalism without opinion is neither practical nor democratic.”
The lawsuit specifically challenges multiple provisions of the Broadcasting Code on the grounds that they are vague, overly broad, and fail to provide sufficient legal certainty.
According to SERAP and NGE, such provisions grant excessive discretion to regulators and risk transforming oversight into indirect censorship.
The organisations further warned that the NBC’s actions, if left unchecked, could have far-reaching consequences ahead of the 2027 general elections.
SERAP and NGE reiterated their commitment to pursuing the case to its conclusion and securing a final determination that strikes down the impugned provisions.
“We will continue to challenge any attempt to weaponize regulation to suppress dissent or control the media. Protecting freedom of expression and media independence is central to advancing transparency, accountability, and human rights in Nigeria,” they said.
The organisations called on the NBC to immediately comply with the court’s order and to review its regulatory framework to ensure alignment with constitutional guarantees and international human rights standards.
They also urged Nigerian authorities to foster an enabling environment for journalists and media organisations to operate freely without fear of intimidation, censorship, or reprisals.
SERAP and NGE said: “This ruling sends a clear message: freedom of expression is not a privilege to be granted or withdrawn by regulators—it is a fundamental right that must be respected, protected, and upheld at all times.”
The lawsuit, with number FHC/L/CS/854/2026 read in part: “Any blanket prohibition on the expression of ‘personal opinions’ by presenters amounts to censorship and is incompatible with constitutional and international standards.
“Nigeria’s obligations under international human rights law reinforce these protections, including Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which guarantee the right to freedom of expression.
“The NBC’s reliance on vague and subjective standards such as ‘professionalism,’ ‘bullying,’ or ‘neutrality’ creates a dangerous framework for arbitrary enforcement. Laws regulating expression must be clear, precise, necessary, and proportionate. Anything less opens the door to abuse and undermines democratic accountability.
“The court’s intervention at this stage is crucial in preventing irreparable harm. Without this injunction, broadcasters would face immediate threats of sanctions simply for performing their constitutional role as watchdogs and platforms for public debate.
“A free, independent, and vibrant media is essential to credible elections. Any attempt to silence critical voices or restrict open debate undermines the public’s right to information and weakens democratic governance.
“The rule of law requires that all public authorities act within the bounds of the Constitution. Subsidiary legislation like the Broadcasting Code cannot override fundamental rights. The court’s decision reinforces the supremacy of the Constitution and the duty of institutions to respect it.”
