The ECOWAS Court of Justice has dismissed an alleged human rights violation suit filed by one Patrick Eholor, on behalf of Makia Media Limited, against the Federal Government.

The applicant had in suit number ECW/CCJ/APP/43/21, alleged that Nigeria’s broadcasting laws violated social media rights, human rights defenders, activists, bloggers, and journalists.

Delivering judgment, Justice Sengu Koroma, Judge Rapporteur, with Justices Ricardo Gonçalves (presiding) and Dupe Atoki (member), dismissed the applicant’s claims and upheld the preliminary objection raised by Nigeria.

The court held that the applicant lacked the legal capacity to bring the matter before it as ‘actio popularis’ (public interest) suit.

According to the community court, the applicant also failed to present evidence mandating him to act in a representational capacity on behalf of Makia Media Limited.

It, therefore, declared the entire suit inadmissible “both as an actio popularis suit and a representational suit.”

“The reliefs sought must be exclusively for the benefit of the public to the exclusion of the personal interest of the applicant,” Justice Koroma held.

The court noted that it only had jurisdiction to entertain the case because it bordered on alleged human rights violations but pointed out that the case was inadmissible.

The court further held that although the applicant had jurisdiction to bring a claim for human rights violation as a corporate body, the suit neither met the requirement of ‘actio popularis’ principle.

According to the community court, the action was not for the benefit of the public, and the applicant did not demonstrate that the victims cannot be envisioned by the court.

Mr Eholor had in his submission argued that various Nigerian Broadcasting Code provisions were inconsistent with the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and International Treaties and Conventions to which Nigeria is a signatory.

The applicant had further claimed that in July 2020, the Respondent through the Nigeria Broadcasting Commission (NBC) began implementation of repressive Sections of the Code, particularly Sections 5, 4 (1), (f) and 5 (4), (3).

He argued that NBC considered coverage on security issues as a threat to governance and engaged in arbitrary arrest and detention of media practitioners.

He further claimed that the respondent also failed to release public information sought by practitioners, which violated their rights to freedom of expression and information.

Responding, Nigeria denied the applicant’s claims, arguing that no court had declared any section of the NBC Code as ambiguous or illegal and the applicant had not been prevented from exercising its rights within the limits of the law.

It added that the applicant was not at any time arrested or detained, and as a corporate body, lacked the capacity to sue for the violation of human rights.

The court, however, ordered Nigeria to pay an interlocutory cost of N250,000 to the applicant due to the respondent’s  “tardiness” in the course of the matter.

(NAN)