In any democratic society, the police are the organ of government used for enforcing the law or maintaining public order or preventing and solving crime. A major instrument or strategic devise that the police use to realize its law enforcement goals is its investigative powers. The investigative powers of the police enable them to pry into any criminal matter, real or imagined.
Equipped with its investigative powers, the police can invite anybody for questioning in matters related to the commission of crime. The powers of the police to invite citizens for questioning are not even limited to cases directly reported to it. The police can invite a citizen for questioning even for the mere suspicion of being a party to the commission of, or intention to commit, a crime. In fact, in Nigeria, the constitution grants the police the powers to investigate public officials who are even protected from criminal prosecution under the immunity provisions of section 308.
However, just like every other thing in life, the investigative powers of the police are not absolute and open-ended. The police, for instance, do not have the right or power to investigate citizens on matters that border on their civil liberties which include the right to free speech and expression. Section 39 (1) of the 1999 constitution (as amended) maintains that, “Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference”. What this means is that an invitation to a citizen for questioning by security agencies on the basis of what he or she published in a newspaper is tantamount to an assault on the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
For the avoidance of doubt, the phrase “Civil liberty” is “a person’s right to say or do what he or she wants provided it is within the law.” Of course, when a citizen says or does (writes, etc) something outside the bounds of the law, the issue becomes a libel case. Now, the word “Libel” means “a false written or printed statement that damages somebody’s reputation or to harm somebody’s reputation by publishing a false statement”. Yes, once a published material slanders anybody or institution, it becomes a libel. However, a libellous material, cannot under any circumstances, become a criminal matter for police investigation.
The truth is that in spite of the enormous investigative powers of the police in crime matters, the police cannot investigate a libel case. An aggrieved party in a “libel case” can only sue for damages, if the offending party refuses to retract a false statement or tender an apology to the party offended by a publication which veracity cannot be vouched for. The position canvassed here holds because libel cases which originate from the interpretation given to a published statement or opinion by an aggrieved party can only be decided by the courts, not by the police. There is no provision anywhere in our statutes for the police to criminalize libel cases and investigate them.
The issue in contention here is the published statement by the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly that appeared as an advertorial in The Nation of Wednesday, May 15, page 12, titled, “Disruption of Democracy and Rule of Law – Anarchy Looms in Rivers State,” addressed to the President. Amongst other things, the advertorial pointed out that “the situation in Rivers State has reached a fever-pitch, as there are strong indications that the Governor; Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, the legislators and prominent government officials have been marked for assassination, following series of reported nocturnal meetings held in the neighbouring state and Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT)”. This quoted paragraph of the advertorial probably captures the essence of the matter for which the Rivers State Commissioner of Police decided to invite the Rivers’ Speaker for questioning.
However, a critical appraisal of the headline, including the phrases used in the advertorial, indicates that the Speaker was only drawing the attention of the public to the activities that have the potential of engendering anarchy in Rivers State and disrupting democracy in Nigeria. For instance, the use of the phrase “strong indications” in the advertorial only means a “suggestion that such incidents are possible or likely to happen” whenever the security details of the affected officials are withdrawn. There is nothing in the statements to suggest that the advertorial was reporting a definitive plot by some people to assassinate the Governor of Rivers State or other government officials, to warrant an investigation by the police.
From the arguments made so far in this discourse, it should be clear, even to the uninformed that the advertorial in question was just an opinion expressed by the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly on the deteriorating state of security in Rivers State. It was not a report to the President or the police about the commission of, or intention to commit, a crime by some Nigerian citizens. It must therefore be the height of duplicity for Joseph Mbu, whose activities in Rivers State should be the subject of a presidential inquiry, to turn round and invite the Speaker for questioning, as if the published advertorial, on its own, is a criminal matter for police investigation.
It is difficult to see how any rational mind could fault the contents of the published advertorial and successfully pursue a libel case. For instance, where the advertorial suggested that there where plans to withdraw the security details of prominent government officials in Rivers State, as a prelude to their possible elimination, the evidence was all over the place with the reduction in the security apparatus of the Speaker and the withdrawal of the police guards attached to the Chief of Staff to the Governor and some local government chairmen. Who does not know that once the security details of government officials are withdrawn from them that they may be prey to violent attacks from criminal elements or even prone to assassinations? And this was the point the Rivers State Speaker made in the published advertorial for which Mbu wants him investigated and prosecuted.
Now, if the police that has the constitutional duty to provide security so that the state assembly can carry out its responsibility to the people have refused to do so, who does not know it may have to do with the fact that the Rivers State police command may be a party to the grand plan to ground activities of the state legislators until they recall the suspended Nsirim-led leadership of the Obio/Akpor Local Government Area? And this, again, was the point the Rivers State Speaker made.
In all honesty, the advertorial is simply an opinion expressed by the Speaker on the unfolding political and security drama in Rivers State. It was not even a report to the President of Nigeria to investigate a matter. In this wise, the police cannot deploy its investigative powers to invite the Speaker for questioning over a publication that he simply used to exercise his right to free speech or expression.
