A civil society organisation identified as the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), has kicked against the imprisonment of two journalists in Kwara State.
OsunDaily News reported earlier that a magistrate court in Ilorin, Kwara state capital, sentenced two journalists, identified as Gidado Shuaib and Olufemi Alfred to three months imprisonment each with a fine of N100,000.00 each.
This platform understands that the two journalists were sentenced for offences related to criminal conspiracy and defamation brought against them.
It was gathered that the two were arraigned in court on a First Information Report dated November 2019 for offences bordering on criminal conspiracy and defamation contrary to sections 97 and 392 of the penal law.
It was learnt that a petition was written against them by Hillcrest Agro-Allied Industries Limited located at Kilometre 4, Ajase-Ipo road, Amberi village, Kwara state, over a published article in News Digest, titled “Inside Kwara Factory where Indian hemp is legalised.”
However, in its reaction to the issue, CISLAC has condemned the act saying it’s a move to muzzle the press and investigative journalism in Nigeria and is unacceptable.
It was learnt the company involved is linked to President Muhammadu Buhari’s Economic Adviser, Sarah Alade.
The Executive Director of CISLAC, Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, who said he was disappointed at the judgement noted that the court went ahead to give its verdict despite the testimony of an ex-employee indicting the company and a lot of infractions by the police.
Rafsanjani in a statement pointed out that “We also demand that an urgent step be taken to reform the country’s laws and ensure journalism is not criminalised like it. International human rights courts and UN bodies have repeatedly ruled against criminal sanctions for defamation.”
The CISLAC boss, however, called on the president to champion the judicial reforms before leaving office in May.
He noted that Nigeria’s ranking in press freedom has continues to decline and “It’s a waste of taxpayers’ money when public funds are used in prosecuting cases of personal interests such as this. ”
