Court declines to reverse judgement stopping NBC from fining broadcast stations

By Biola Adebayo On Nov 23, 2023

Fines , Broadcast Stations, NBC ,Appeal Court, MRA, — Fines on Broadcast Stations: NBC goes to Appeal Court

The Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja, on Thursday, dismissed the National Broadcasting Commission, NBC’s motion seeking an order setting aside its judgement restraining the commission from imposing fines on broadcast stations in the country.

The judge, James Omotosho, in a judgement, dismissed all the grounds put forward by the NBC, describing same as “an afterthought.”

Mr Omotosho held that despite being served with the originating process and hearing notices in the case leading to the judgment, the commission failed to file its defence.

The judge said contrary to the NBC’s argument that it was not served with court processes that led to the judgement, “the court file shows that services were effected on the respondent applicant (NBC) but failed to file and refused to enter appearance.”

He said there was an affidavit of facts deposed to by the court bailiff that confirmed that court processes were served on the commission on different occasions.

“The respondent applicant cannot claim it was not served. The objection is hereby overruled,” he said.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mr Omotosho had, on 10 May, given an order of perpetual injunction restraining NBC from imposing fines on broadcast stations.

The judge, in a judgement, also set aside the N500,000 fines imposed, on 1 March 2019, on each of the 45 broadcast stations alleged to have violated its code.

He held that NBC, not being a court of law, had no power to impose sanctions as punishment on broadcast stations.

He further held that the NBC Code, which gives the commission the power to impose sanctions, conflicts with Section 6 of the Constitution which vested judicial power in the court of law.

The judgement followed a suit filed by Media Rights Agenda (MRA), a civil society organisation concerned with freedom of information.

In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1386/2021, the group sued NBC as the sole respondent.

In the motion dated November 2021, by its lawyer, Noah Ajare, the group sought a declaration that the sanctions procedure applied by NBC in imposing N500,000 fines on each of the 45 broadcast stations on 1 March 2019, was a violation of the rules of natural justice, among others.

NBC’s push for reversal

However, after the judgement was delivered, NBC filed a motion on notice through its lawyer, Babatunde Ogala, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), seeking “an order setting aside the default judgment, being a judgment reached per incuriam and without jurisdiction.”

Giving a 20-ground argument, the commission said the originating motion in the suit which birthed the judgement delivered on 10 May was not served on them.

It argued that the rights group had two un-appealed, subsisting and binding decisions of the court on the same issues on the parties.

It said that the judge, Obiora Egwuatu, delivered the judgement in the suit number: FHC/ABJ/1365/2021 on 3 March in its favour.

Besides, the NBC said on 26 April 2022, Nkeonye Maha delivered judgement in suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1436/2020 against the group on the same subject matter submitted for consideration before Mr Omotosho.

It said rather than appeal against same, the group brought a fresh suit before the court, “setting the honourable court up for a collision course with decisions of your Learned Brothers of the Federal High Court in the same complex.”

It argued that the group failed to serve the commission with court processes because all the facts stated above would have been brought to the attention of the court.

The commission, which accused the group of engaging in a multiplicity of actions, said it was an abuse of the court process.

“That having presented the issues for adjudication before a competent court of Law, the issues decided and judgement delivered, the issues are res judicata on the parties except on appeal,” it said, among other things.

MRA fights back

But the group, the MRA, through its counsel, Mr Ajare, disagreed with NBC.

It insisted that the commission was duly served but refused to appear in court, urging the court to discountenance the arguments.

He argued that the subject matters were different and the court, having delivered the judgment, was functus officio (lacked jurisdiction to re-examine its decision).

Mr Omotosho agreed with Mr Ajare’s submission that the court lacked jurisdiction to reopen the case already decided.

Judge rules

The judge gave instances where a court can set aside its judgement. He said such instances include when the judgement was obtained by fraud, when a party was not served to give its defence, when it was a nullity, etc.

According to him, it is clear from the above that service of process confers jurisdiction on the court.

He dismissed the argument that the case was an abuse of the court process as NBC failed to bring those facts before the court but folded its arms to allow the court to decide on the matter.

According to him, equity does not aid indolence; rather, equity aids the vigilant not the indolent, citing a previous case of the Supreme Court to back his decision.

“A party challenging the jurisdiction of the court must do that timeously.

“These are facts the respondent applicant (NBC) ought to have brought before the court but did not avail itself of this opportunity.

“It is a futile attempt to get the court to set aside this judgment.

“The respondent applicant should bear the consequences of its own indolence.

“In the final analysis, it is an afterthought and belated. The application to set aside the judgment is hereby refused,” the judge declared.

(NAN)