The Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria (NPAN) has explained why it accepted the N120 million offer for 12 of its members from the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) as compensation for losses the media houses incurred following a military clampdown on newspapers by the immediate-past administration in June 2014.
According to it, the decision to collect the money for the affected media houses as compensation for impounding their newspapers and stoppage of circulation by security forces during the administration of former president Goodluck Jonathan was to avoid “prolonged confrontation,” the type some of its members had with the government during the military era.
In a statement after an expanded executive council meeting in Lagos, the umbrella body of print media organisations noted that having examined the issue of compensation after the onslaught against the media by the Nigerian military last year, it became necessary that some clarifications be made.
NPAN lamented that even those bereft of facts were trying to link it “with the alleged misdeeds of those who may have received huge sums of money from the office of the NSA unlawfully,” but that nothing could be farther from the truth.
Noting that there was no way its members would have suspected that the money given to them as compensation came from the office of the NSA since his office oversees the operation of the security forces that launched the assault on the media, to some extent, the association assured Nigerians “that the fierce independence, diversity and forthrightness that have characterised the Nigerian press remain unshaken.”
In the statement by its Deputy President, Mallam Kabiru Yusuf and General Secretary, Dame Comfort Obi, the newspaper proprietors said that following the unlawful seizure of newspapers, its members suffered huge losses in sales and advertising revenue as well as in business goodwill.
NPAN explained that while many of its members “affected by this reckless assault considered resorting to the courts to seek redress, the development became even more alarming when “the military authorities claimed that they had intelligence that newspaper vans were being used to ferry bomb-making materials, an outrageous charge that seems to be a prelude to some sort of clampdown.”
It added that in the face of the growing tension, the then president Jonathan decided to hold a meeting with NPAN’s executive on June 12, 2014 at the State House in Marina, Lagos, apparently in a move to “stem the spate of multiple litigations against security agencies and the federal government.”
The statement further noted: “At this meeting, Jonathan apologised for the (infringement) on press freedom and the disruption of the business rhythm of our members. This was well-received by our members. In recognition of the president’s gesture, one of our executive officers, Lady Maiden Ibru, spoke in favour of the association dropping the demand for compensation, but because some members wanted to seek redress in court, it was decided to pursue a civil resolution of the matter.
“The federal government and NPAN agreed to settle the matter out of court. In consequence of this, members were requested to submit a statement of their losses for consideration. All active member newspapers submitted their claims, with some as low as N100,000 and others running into hundreds of millions.
With no easy way to verify these widely divergent claims, the association’s leadership accepted the offer from the government of a flat rate of N10 million to each of the 12 media houses affected. The total amount came to N120 million.
“Having suffered a lot of harassments during the military era, with some cases still winding their way through our courts, members agreed to a reasonable settlement over prolonged confrontation. Most of our members duly collected the compensation in good faith. Meanwhile the cheques for The Guardian, Tribune and Peoples Daily, are still with our secretariat.
“Member newspapers that received the money could not have any suspicion why it was paid from the Office of the National Security Adviser since the onslaught on newspapers was carried out by the security forces over which the office of the NSA, to some extent, superintend.”
-Leadership
