By virtue of the provisions of
section 39 (1) of the 1999 constitution, every person shall be entitled to
freedom of expression which includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive
and impart ideas and information without interference. The right to freedom of
speech, according to Bernard shaw, is predication on the theory that “ every body
is wrong on some point on which somebody also is right so that there is a
public danger in allowing anybody to unheard”. Also justice Cardozo said in
PALKO V. CONNECTICUT, an American case, that freedom of expression is “the
matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other form of speech”.
Also, professor Ajomo eloquently stated that freedom of expression is the
bedrock of democratic
process. It stems from that fact that no one has the
monopoly of truth. Based on this ground, it is apparently proved in section
39(2) that without prejudice to the provision of section 39(2), every person
shall be entitled to own, establish and operate any medium for the
dissemination of information, ideas and opinions.
It
is implied in this section that every person has the right to establish private
schools and higher institution in OKOGIE V. A. G. of LAGOS STATE (1981) INCLR
218, it was held that section 36 (2) of the 1979 constitution (which is impair
materia with section 39 (2) of the 1999 constitution) guaranteed the right to
establish any medium for the dissemination of information, ideas and opinions
and this includes establishment of schools or institutions for imparting
information, ideas, knowledge and opinions.
The
freedom of expression and the press guaranteed under the constitution can be
restricted in that under section 45 of the 1999 constitution, the state is
permitted to make any law which is reasonably justifiable in a democratic
society in the interest of defense, public safety, public order, public
morality, public health or for protecting the rights and freedoms of other
person shall may in turn restrict the freedom of speech, and the press.
Meanwhile, section 39(3) provides that a law shall not be invalidated if it is
reasonably justifiable in a democratic society:
a.
for
the purpose of preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence,
maintaining the authority and independence of court or regulating telephone,
wireless broadcasting, television or the exhibition of cinematograph films or.
b.
Imposing
restrictions upon persons holding office under the government of the federation
or of a state, member of the armed forces of the federation or members of the
Nigeria police force or other government security services or agencies
established by law.
Journalists are immune from being
compelled to disclose the source of their information, but a journalist can be
compelled to reveal the source of information in the public interest.
In SENATE V. TONY MOMOH the
plaintiff, editor of Daily Times, was summoned by the senate of the national
assembly to come and disclose the source of his information of an article about
how senators lobby for contracts from the executive branch of government. The
High Court held that any attempt to force the plaintiff to disclose the source
of has information, apparently given in confidence, is an infringement on his
freedom of expression without interference, guaranteed by the constitution.
On
appeal by the senate to the court of appeal, the court held that mere invitation
by the senate did not infringe the fundamental right of the respondent and the
appeal was upheld.
RELATED INFORMATION