Lably
Skip to content

Censorship in Nigeria

  • 5 min read
  • 3 chapters

Explore on Lably

ToursExplore Lably’s 3D tours

Press censorship

From 1859 to 1960, the Nigerian press was privately owned. However, this did not guarantee the freedom of speech since the majority of newspaper proprietors were actively involved in politics. Therefore, these newspapers typically acted as advocates of their owner's political interest. In addition, the pressure coming from ethnic groups was also a contributing factor to self-censorship among news organizations. News that expose certain “undesirable” aspects of a tribe may suffer a boycott, or in some cases cause ethnic tension. An example of this kind of ethnic tension happened in 1957, when the Igbo newspaper the West African Pilot provided news with a clear bias against a Yoruba political group called Egbe Omo Oduduwa. The Yorubas responded by launching their own news outlet called the Daily Service in order to retaliate and making corrections to those statements. From then on, in order to avoid conflicts, each news organization catered their message according to the desire of the local leaders. For example, the Tribune tends to be more considerate when mentioning issues related to the Yorubas while the Kaduna-based New Nigerians carefully vetted the northern opinion on national matters. The Yorubas, as an ethnic group, have the most influence over the news since they occupy most media-rich territories in the country, including the country's largest city. Today, newspapers continue to represent the interests of distinct ethnic groups.

In 1961, the government started an operation to gain control of the press. It began with the seizure of the Morning Post's headquarters, a very prominent and important news outlet in Lagos. The government then controlled it so tightly that the paper eventually went into decline and shut down in 1972.

After the demise of the Morning Post, other newspapers followed suit as the government slowly expanded its influence over the press. Although many news organizations did go out of business as a result of being manipulated by the government, others such as the Daily Times of Nigeria survived and continue to operate to this day despite having been controlled by the government since 1977.

In 1999, freedom of expression became protected by the new Nigerian Constitution. However, defamation laws were afterwards passed. Critics maintain that though measures of freedom of the press have improved, there is still room for improvement. Nigeria was described as "partly free" in the Freedom of the Press 2011 report published by the Freedom House (see yearly rankings in Freedom House ratings in Nigeria section).

On April 26, 2020, the Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index ranked Nigeria 115th out of 180 countries surveys. Reporters without Borders cited killings, detentions and the brutalisation of journalists alongside targeted attempts to shrink the civic space by the Nigerian government as reason for the ranking. However, this rank is higher than the rank of 146th which Transparency International gave Nigeria earlier in the year regarding corruption. The Reporters without Borders report further stated “With more than 100 independent newspapers, Africa’s most populous nation enjoys real media pluralism but covering stories involving politics, terrorism or financial embezzlement by the powerful is very problematic."

Gag orders

In July 2021, the National Broadcasting Commission issued a gag order barring all journalists and broadcast stations in the country from reporting details of terrorists, kidnappers, and victims. After unsuccessfully calling for the gag order's withdrawal, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and the Centre for Journalism Innovation and Development (PTCIJ) filed a lawsuit against President Muhammadu Buhari and Minister of Information and Culture Lai Mohammed, with National Broadcasting Commission also named as a defendant. The plaintiffs asked the court to “declare illegal the gag order" and to compel the defendants to withdraw the directive, arguing that it was "inconsistent and incompatible with sections 22 and 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".

Sign in to keep reading

2 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in India