In this piece, Solomon Okedara writes that the National Council for Arts and Culture (NCAC)‘s intention to put Kechi Augustine alias Tekno’s name on security agencies’ watch lists may contravene his right to freedom of movement.
If the name Kelechi Augustine comes up a million times in the media, chances are that it will not catch the fancy of most readers. The name “Tekno”, on the other hand, will readily do, especially among young Nigerians. Clearly, Kelechi Augustine and Tekno describe the same person: a fast rising Nigerian Hip-Hop star. Recently, Tekno was reportedly arrested by the Police for allegedly dancing in a moving van with four semi-nude women on the Lekki-Ikoyi Bridge in Lagos as part of a musical video. He was later reported to have been released on bail on health ground.
Tekno afterwards went ahead to release the musical video, bearing the title: “Agege.” Responding to the development, the Federal Government through the National Council for Arts and Culture (NCAC) expressed its utter disappointment and surprise that the artiste still went ahead to release the song even while investigation by the Police was still ongoing. The artiste, in the four-minute video, was seen throwing money suspected to be dollar bills at the young women.
Angered by this development, the NCAC therefore, vowed to make the artiste a scapegoat. In a statement by NCAC Director-General (DG) Chief Olusegun Runsewe published by leading national dailies including The Punch, The Guardian and The Nation among others, the DG was quoted to have said that “Now that he has released the shameful video when investigation is still ongoing, we are going to inform security agencies to place him on their watch lists, because his action is a threat to national security and a bad influence on Nigerian youths.”
This statement came to many Nigerians as a rude shock knowing that our nation as at today is built on rule of law and our collective lives, including enforcement of laws and punishment of crimes, only thrive on observance of rule and due process. A look at the enabling law of the National Council for Arts and Culture which is the National Council for Arts and Culture Act shows what the council was set up to do. Section 3(1) (a) of the Act which incorporates the main function of the council provides the function as “to promote and foster the appreciation, revival and development of Nigerian arts and culture” Every other function listed in Section 3 of the Act is an extension of “appreciation, revival and development” of Nigerian arts and culture. If these are the functions of NCAC, where then does the council derive the power to report a person allegedly engaged in immoral conduct to security agencies and demand such a person be placed on their watch lists? NCAC may just quickly have to admit that its position on this matter is an overreach and immediately withdraw not only its statement but from taking further steps as any step connected to the said statement will be ultravires just like the statement itself. If NCAC or anyone is still in doubt as to whether it has power to act in this regard, the council may have to check with the National Film and Video Censors Board (NFVCB) which is the appropriate agency to act on the matter.
Again, what kind of persons have their names placed on security agencies’ watch lists? They are people who pose threat to national security, national defence, public health or those who have been indicted in very serious criminal offences. Such people whose names may be placed on security agencies’ watch lists are always suspected terrorists, carriers of epidemic diseases and fugitives of law. Even if an artiste’s song poses a threat to public morals, it is the song that could have its airplay either restricted or outrightly banned and NFVCB is statutorily empowered to act in this regard and has been doing this to the knowledge of the general public. From the narrative by NCAC itself and analysis given here, it is obvious that Tekno does not belong to the class of the people whose names could be on security agencies’ watch lists.
Bringing this to a close, what in itself is the effect or implication of the expressed intention of NCAC to inform security agencies to place Tekno on watch lists? Placing the artiste on watch list of security agencies mean that he can be prevented from leaving Nigeria and may be picked up by security agencies if he is entering Nigeria at any time. This will, therefore constitute, among others, a threat to his right to freedom of movement which includes his right to leave Nigeria and re-enter Nigeria without restriction. This is a right that is recognised and protected by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) and other regional and international instruments. Interestingly, Section 46 of the 1999 Constitution gives access to court to any person who believes that any of his constitutionally protected rights including right to freedom of movement has been contravened, is being contravened or is likely to be contravened. This statement of NCAC’s intention to have Tekno’s name placed on security agencies’ watch lists shows a likelihood of contravention of his right to freedom of movement. In BRAITHWAITE v. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK NIGERIA LIMITED (2011) LPELR (CA), the court held that “Section 46 (1) 1999 Constitution allows access to court in the circumstance. Such a violation or threatened violation of right confers the Applicant the locus standi to sue quiatimet (because he fears) for the protection of this right against its threat and imminent interference or erosion”
NCAC is, therefore, advised to desist from acting above and beyond its statutory functions and allow the appropriate agency to act in the circumstance. The council will do well to focus more on appreciation, revival and development of arts and culture which it was set up to do. By the way, since promoting traditional dancing is one of the ancillary functions of NCAC, we may then ask how regularly does the council organise traditional dancing competitions across the federation? How well does it give financial, technical and policy-related support to our young girls and our boys who are striving hard to give expression to their lofty dreams in arts? How many flourishing Nigerian artistes can testify that their career successes enjoyed support from NCAC or how many of them can NCAC lay claim to be part of their success stories? If NCAC can channel the same passion it demonstrated in Tekno’s case into its statutory functions, the agency will overwhelmingly fulfil its mandate and our society will be better for it.
- Okedara is a Digital Rights lawyer and co-founder, Digital Rights Lawyers Initiative.
Leave a Reply