Court restrains NBC from sanctioning broadcasters over code provisions, Amnesty International hails ruling

The Federal High Court in Lagos has restrained the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) from sanctioning broadcast stations under disputed provisions of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code.

Join the Premium Times WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.

Open in WhatsApp

The judge, Daniel Osiagor, delivered the ruling in a case brought by the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and the Nigerian Guild of Editors, testing the boundaries of media regulation in Nigeria.

Mr Osiagor granted the interim injunction following an ex parte application filed by the applicants.

In an order dated 4 May, the court restrained the NBC, its officers and agents from enforcing or imposing sanctions on broadcast stations based on specific sections of the 6th edition of the Nigeria Broadcasting Code, pending the hearing of a motion on notice.

“It is hereby ordered as follows: THAT AN ORDER OF INTERIM INJUNCTION is granted restraining the Defendant, its Officers, agents, privies, assigns, associates or any other person or group of persons from enforcing, imposing sanctions, or levying fines on any broadcasting station 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 pending the hearing and determination of the Motion on Notice for an order of interlocutory injunction filed simultaneously in this suit,” the judge wrote.

The ruling effectively halts enforcement of NBC’s recent “Formal Notice,” issued in April, which warned broadcasters against presenting personal opinions as facts, intimidating guests or failing to maintain neutrality in their programmes, and threatened sanctions for violations.

The directive had drawn swift criticism from civil society and media stakeholders, who argued that it could be used to censor journalists and suppress dissenting views, particularly as political activities begin to build toward the 2027 elections.

Stay Ahead with Premium Times

Add as a preferred source on Google

The suit, marked FHC/L/CS/854/2026, was filed on 24 April by SERAP and the Nigerian Guild of Editors, who described the commission’s directive as “arbitrary, unconstitutional and unlawful.”

In their originating processes, the groups argued that the provisions relied upon by the NBC are “vague and overly broad,” contending that they infringe on the constitutional right to freedom of expression and are inconsistent with Nigeria’s international human rights obligations.

They told the court that unless restrained, the NBC would continue to use the provisions to “threaten and sanction broadcast stations and presenters” carrying out their professional duties.

The plaintiffs maintained that journalism inherently accommodates opinion, noting that “the right to impart ideas necessarily includes opinions, commentary and analysis,” which they said are central to democratic discourse.

They also warned that the commission’s stance could create a chilling effect on the media, encouraging self-censorship and weakening the watchdog role of the press at a critical political moment.

SERAP and the editors’ guild further argued that the Broadcasting Code, as subsidiary legislation, cannot override the provisions of the Constitution.

Amnesty International reacts

Reacting, Amnesty International Nigeria described the court’s decision as a boost for free expression and media independence.

In a statement on Wednesday, the organisation said the interim injunction marked “an important step” toward protecting journalists and media organisations from what it called regulatory overreach.

READ ALSO: Editors fault NBC over threat to sanction broadcasters

“The ruling by Justice Daniel Osiagor marks an important step toward protecting freedom of expression and media independence in Nigeria,” the group said.

It criticised the NBC directive as “vague, open to abuse, and risks silencing critical voices,” warning that its enforcement could have a chilling effect across the media landscape.

While welcoming the court’s intervention, Amnesty noted that the order is interim and does not finally resolve the dispute over the legality of the NBC’s action.

“While the ruling provides immediate relief, it is not a final judgment, and the threat posed by the notice remains,” the organisation stated.

Amnesty International called on the NBC to withdraw the directive entirely and refrain from adopting similar measures that could restrict press freedom, urging authorities to ensure that journalists can carry out their duties without intimidation or undue interference.

The court adjourned the case until 1 June for the hearing of the motion on notice.