In 1982, l was part of the “Shagari must go” protesters at the National Assembly, Race course, Lagos. Sunday Adewusi, the IGP, deployed his “kill and go” as MOPOLS were known then, to deal with us and they ruthlessly dealt with us. Shagari didn’t charge any of us for treason.
When Daniel Kanu of “Youths Earnestly Ask of Abacha (YEAA), organized his One million man march for Abacha to transmute into a civilian president, here in Lagos, we organised our five million man march ABACHA MUST GO protest in Yaba, Lagos, which was brutally suppressed by the police and army.
Despite these, we were not charged with treason. Now, treason don become two for ten kobo. But it’s embarrassing that a president who was part of a pro-democracy movement, now sees protests as treason. Sad. Criticisms and dissent are part of the ingredients of democracy. Making protests and dissent treasonable offences is preposterous.
It is apposite for me to quote Justice Olajide Olatawura, JCA (as he then was), in the case of Arthur Nwankwo v. The State (1985) 6 NCLR 228 at pages 252 – 253, Olatawura, J.C.A. stated as follows:
“………It is my view that the law of sedition which has derogated from the freedom of speech guaranteed under this Constitution is inconsistent with the 1979 Constitution more so when this cannot lead to a public disorder as envisaged under s.41(a) of the 1979 Constitution. We are no longer the illiterates or the mob society our colonial masters had in mind when the law was promulgated.
The whole of Cap. XXX111 which deals with Defamation is sufficient guarantee against defamatory libel.
The safeguard provided under S.50(2) is inadequate more so where the truth of what is published is no
defence.
To retain S.51 of the Criminal Code, in its present form, that is even if not inconsistent with the freedom of expression guaranteed by our constitution will be a deadly weapon and to be used at will by a corrupt government or a tyrant.
I hereby express my doubt about its retention in our criminal code more so, and as said earlier, there is adequate provision in the same criminal code for criminal libel.
Let us not diminish from the freedom gained from our colonial masters by resorting to laws enacted by them to suit their purposes.
The decision of the founding fathers of this present constitution which guarantees freedom of speech which must include freedom to criticise should be praised and any attempt to derogate from it except as provided by the constitution must be resisted.
Those in public office should not be intolerant of criticism. Where a writer exceeds the bounds there should be a resort to the law of libel where the plaintiff must by necessity put his character and reputation in issue. Criticism is indispensable in a free society.”
See the State v. The Ivory Trumpet Publishing Co. Ltd. (1984) 5 NCLR 736 at page 756.”
-Richard Akinnola
